your hands on your heart to say the pledge of allegiance. please unmute everyone.

okay. all right. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america. and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all. thank you. please call roll. >> clerk: yes. commissioner dejesus. >> present. >> commissioner hamasaki. >> present. >> commissioner elias. >> here. >> commissioner rickter? >> present. and commissioner cohen is excused. vice president taylor, you have a quorum. and we have director from the department of police accountability and the chief. >> thank you. for members of the public, the

number to call in to provide public comment is 415-665-0001. and access code 14664628. 26, i believe. and remind the members of the public to have any of your devices on mute and there is no background noise and same thing for the presenters and commissioners unless you are speaking. try to reduce the background noise by having yourself muted. if you can please call the first line item, sergeant. >> line item one, reports to the commission, discussion. 1a, chief's report, weekly crime trends. provide an overview of offenses occurring in san francisco. major/significant incidents and provide a summary of planned activities and events that will include a brief overview of unplanned events or activities occurring in san francisco having an impact on public safety. commission discussion on unplanned events and activities that the chief describes will be limited to determining whether the calendar if a future meeting. presentation of the audit of

electronic communication devices for bias third quarter 2020. presentation of the earthquake safety and emergency response bond program 2020, police facilities. >> good evening, chief. >> thank you. good evening, vice president taylor, commissioner, executive director henderson. i will start off the report this week and i am going to start off this week with the most significant incident of the week was an officer-involved shooting that happened saturday night just before midnight. and just going to stick to what we put out in terms of our information to the public and the media. and i will finish that by saying that we are planning a town hall this coming monday. it will be virtual as the last one was because of covid considerations, but it will be monday at 3:00 p.m. and are planning to release the video and the body worn camera

in that town hall as well. but the details unfortunately, the person involved in the incident lost his life. and on october 10 at approximately 11:26 p.m., our officers responded to report of an attempted carjacking with a knife at market street and goal street. officers located the suspect and pursued the suspect where they attempted to detain him. during the contact an officer-involved shooting occurred which was captured and the officer's body worn camera. the suspect is identified as 21-year-old caesar vargsa was struck by gun fire, and our officers immediately rendered aid and summoned medics to the scene. mr. vargas succumbed to the

injuries and died at the scene officers located a knife. the incident is in the early stages of the investigation and is being investigated by the san francisco district attorney's office who has the responsibility for the criminal investigation. looking at whether the officer involved shooting was legal. the san francisco police department internal affairs division and the department of police accountability all who were at the scene on saturday night. additional information will be released as it becomes available and as i said, as our commitment to transparency and accountability, we have scheduled a town hall recording this incident that will be held this coming monday at 3:00 p.m., and it will be virtual. so it will be on our website as well as on sfgov tv. now i will go to our weekly

crime trends. starting with our overall crime trends for the week. for the week we are actually the part one crimes we are down in property crimes 17%. year to date we are down in property crimes 24%. we are still having some significant challenges with residential burglary which are throughout the city, although we did -- a piece of encouraging news. we did make 11 arrest this is past month for residential particularry, so we hope that will make a difference in slowing this trend down. we continue to address the strategies by really honing in on some of the more chronic people that have been involved in burglaries. really focussing on them, so that will continue. and control strategies in areas where we have seen spikes hopefully will make a difference as well. we're 42% up year to date which

is -- i'm sorry, actually more than that. hang on one second. i lost my place here. 44% up year to date, which is significant, so we will continue to work on that. otherwise property crimes across the board are down other than burglary. we are continuing to address our strategies through key ways as we reopen our economy as you have seen in the news probably, many of the restaurants and shopping establishments are reopening. we're starting to have more people come back to the city which is good news. so we want to make sure that we don't have spike in car burglaries as people start to come back out and enjoy our city. so that will continue. on that note, we are 45% down compared to 2018 and 52% down in car burglaries compared to 2017. when you look at the comparison to the last year, 2019, we are

42% down in car burglaries. our violent crime is up for the week by 18% unfortunately. overall for the year our violent crime is down 21%. we are up in homicides as i explain to the public in the commission last week, and we're still up in homicides, although we did not have any homicide this is week. we had two homicides in october, following a pretty bad month in september where we had five. other 39 homicides year to date we have a 74% clearance rate and we are -- we made actually an arrest the other day on our last homicide, so that case is in progress and we will be presenting that to the district attorney's office. looking at shootings, which is also up by 11% year to date, the

breakdown is six of the 10 districts and the most significant increase in shooting year to date are bayview, 40 compared to 31. engleside, 14 compared to 8, and tenderloin 18 compared to 8. and then mission 13 compared to 9. the northern district, central district, southern district, and richmond district are all down year to date, and the far district is up from zero shoot this time last year to one shooting. we are focussing our efforts on those districts that are the most violent, and hopefully we can turn this around heading into the last quarter of the year. the good news is we did not have a homicide over the past week. other significant incidents this past week, as i said, no homicides, but we did have three

shooting incident this is past week resulting in three victims being shot. on wednesday, october 7, at 10:36 officers found a victim who was bleeding from his leg and had an apparent gunshot wound. this happened in the parking lot of the safeway west on webster street in the northern district. the victim was transported to the hospital and is in stable condition. we are looking for information on that particular incident. if anyone had any information, please call our tip line 415-575-4444. second incident on thursday, october 8, at 12:05 a.m., the victim was walking home from a house party on the 200 block of texas and bayview in the petrero area. the victim's girlfriend was inside her residence when she heard an argument outside followed by gunshot. she found the victim outside suffering from gunshot wounds to his lower body, and the victim

was transported to the hospital where he understood went surgery. -- where he underwent surgery. just now before this meeting started i was just informed that today a couple of minutes ago made an arrest on that case and also recovered a gun, but that is an ongoing investigation. actually, uncovered two guns and made two arrests. that is an ongoing investigation, but happy to report we did recover two guns and so we have arrested the suspects in that case. third incident on friday, october 9, at 4:22 p.m., the victim and an acquaintance were in the vehicle at the 1100 block in the bayview district when an s.u.v. with four subjects pulled alongside them. one of the subjects asked the victims where he was from, which is the sign that this was gang related. and the victim feared for his life and tried to drive away but suffered gunshot wound and then he crashed his vehicle as he tried to flee. the victim did not suffer any life threatening injuries in this case, and again, we are

looking for the public's help in solving this particular shooting. >> on 10:13, october 13 at 9:30 p.m., this is the fourth incident in which a victim was actually shot -- so three of the incidents we had victims hit. the last one that i mentioned the victim was not shot, but he crashed his vehicle and was not injured from the actual shooting. the fourth incident which was last night at 9:30 p.m., the victim was in the area of ghost street in southern district and was actually at a candle light vigil memorializing the person who lost his life in the officer-involved shooting. the victim felt a burning sensation and realized she had been shot. she was transported to the hospital and is in stable condition. that one is under investigation. we are also looking for witnesses in that. there was this was not a whole lot of evidence to go from.

and the last shooting incident with the shots fired incident in allison jones, where a victim was -- this was today at 12:27 a.m. the victim was located and was transported in critical condition. the suspect was actually located and barricaded himself in an apartment and was later arrested in that particular case. so again, gun violence is a significant issue in our city that we will continue to focus on and continue to work with all of our parameter partners along with community and hopefully turn this around in the last quarter of this year. and that concludes this portion of my report. if there are any questions. >> thank you, chief. i don't see any questions from the commissioners.

i have a brief question. you mentioned the town hall for the ois is on monday at 3:00 p.m. will you be playing the body worn camera footage at that town hall? >> yes. >> all right. thanks. >> thank you. >> commissioner elias -- >> if you have a question, put your name in the chat. >> chief, will information to log onto the town hall, how will that be disseminated to the public and can we also put that information on our website so people will have access to that information so they can join in on the town hall? >> yes, commissioner elias, they will. and if the public is also on sfgov tv and they are, like the last virtual, helping us put this on. it will be on sfgov tv and we will put it on the website as well as give that information to sergeant youngblood.

and with the opening question. chief, call the next item. >> now we have a presentation of the third quarter electronic devices presented by commander robert o'sullivan. >> thank you, chief. sergeant youngblood k you hear me? >> yes. >> thank you. good evening, vice president taylor, commissioner, chief scott, and director henderson. i am commander robert o'sullivan and i am here tonight to present the third quarter audit for the electronic communication devices for bias. i will start this evening as i always do with this presentation to provide some background for the commission as well as the viewing public. all members are aware the department's electronic

communication devices and systems are audited and the members do not have an expectation of privacy. the following documents explain the department's policies concerning the use of communication devices and systems. number one, department general order 10.08, which is titled use of computers and peripheral equipment. department bulletin 19-051 titled sfpd members expectation of privacy, use of computers, peripheral equipment, and facilities. and finally, third, internal affairs bureau order 18-02. it is important to know the auditor limited to devices that the department owns and not any member personal devices. the audits, however, do capture electronic messages that are transmitted from personal devices to department devices. three systems are audited, and they are as follows. number one, level two, which is

california law enforcement telecommunications system and i will refer to that as clets. and email and text messages and all sworn department members are issued a department issued phone. a department owned phone. i will explain how each one of these audits and the systems are audited in the results of the third quarter 2020 audit. first, level two. the program was established which searches all entries made into the system using an established word list. and that word list has procter & gamblesly 65 word on it and is passive in nature and runs continuously. if the member uses one of the identified words, the hit is generated and sent to personnel via the level two access portal. each hit is printed, scanned, and saved to a file. staff analyzes every hit

throughout the week and those determined to be potentially biassed are investigated. the level two audit process has been fully operational since december of 2016, so coming coming up on four years now. third quarter results from july 1 through september 30, there were 52 hits returned from the program, and after review by iad members, none of the 52 hits were determined to be potential any bias. our second system, the department email. all emails sent and received through the department's server are audited using an established word list. it is passive in nature. if an email contains one of the identified words on the list, a hit is generated and sent to ied personnel via email address used exclusively for this audit process. those emails are saved and maintained on the server. staff, like with the clets hits analyzes every hit and those

determine to be potentially biassed are investigated. from july 1 through september 30, there were 259 hits returned from the program. after review by ied members, none of the 259 hits was determined to be potentially bias oriented. our third and final system, cellular phones. audits of text messages sent and received via each department issued phone was conducted by, again, the internal affairs division. and investigators are trained to conduct active audits using a program developed by cellular provider at&t in conjunction with the sfpd information technology division. every 30 days a search is done of all text using the established word list. additional terms can be searched as well. staff analyzes every hit to determine then cotext in which the term was used. those hits determine to be potentially biassed are investigate and all false positive hits are saved by at&t.

from july 1 through september 30, there were 511 hits returned from the program and after review by ied members, two of the 51 hits were determined to be potentially bias oriented. administrative investigations have been initiated into both of those potentially bias circumstances. that concludes my presentation. and i am open for your questions or comments. >> thank you. what, if anything, can you tell us about those two potentially biassed hits, and when will the substance and the conclusion of the investigations come before the commission? >> so i can't tell you what those words are. that is not for public disclosure. obviously i can't do that in this forum. what i can tell you is that the administrative investigation will certainly be done within

the statute of one year per 3304 of the government code. and in all likelihood these investigations, although i am not been given feedback to depth of them just yet. that will take a while because it is in the preliminary stages but if the investigations follow others that we have done, it will be a matter of a handful of months before we come to an investigative conclusion. in the event that there is a finding of a sustained violation of department policy, that will go through the risk management office up to and including the chief of police and based on the chief's decision as to what the appropriate discipline should be, it would then be decided as to whether or not that particular case would be forwarded to the commission for your review. >> president: i'm sorry? >> i'm sorry, commissioner, i was going to add -- i know you

know -- but for the public and if the recommended discipline exceeds 10 days, that particular case is then forwarded to your office. if it's 10 days or less, that is discipline stays in the chief level. >> president: i think you mentioned that the time period is july 1 through september 30. so then we're october 14 right now. am i right that the investigation would have been two weeks in whatever investigations have been pending? trying to get a sense of how long it will take. >> the first hit occurred in the month of july. and the second hit occurred in august and the investigations have been open and pending since the hit? >> a they have been pending -- they have been initiated. but pending in the sense they haven't been concluded, yes. >> correct.

okay. >> in order, maybe i can answer or provide this feedback is that we don't wait until the conclusion of the quarter to start the investigation. >> good. all right. >> the audit itself is done on a regular basis. >> president: okay. any questions? i don't see any questions from commissioners. all right. next item. >> thank you, commissioner. next i will turn to deputy chief yee to introduce the other presenters. and this and this report is on project management and some of the facilities that we are in the process of upgrading and the status of those projects. so deputy chief yee? >> good evening, vice president taylor, commissioner, chief scott, and the executive director henderson. tonight mr. charleser degeurse

will present the emergency general bond obligation opportunities which will allow the city to structurally upgrade some and i will turn it over to mr. harris. >> thank you and good afternoon. my name is charles and i am the public works acting director for project management. in this role i am responsible for insuring the successful delivery of bond programs and the capital projects that result and to present the response 20 bond program. as you know the city's capital plan identifies the funding sources for the improvement of the city, facilities and

infrastructure. in the case of the sefk and this source has been voter approved other than by again obligation bonds and look forward to a similar in 2027. >>ache and we are impressive to bump the level of voter support and to which we have been enabled to improve first responder facilities and infrastructure. the first bonds produced other $800 million in funding for projects. with regard to police, this funded the new police headquarters and and with the focused improvement at various stations. and the new traffic and the

project currently under instruction and the et voer approved passage of the 2020 provides $121 million for police projects. how we arrived at which projects will be advanced with this and of the highest importance and to make sure that the dushrabilityf facilities is sufficient to protect those in the facilities and the public served. we have had a thoroughen and according to the city's own seismic hazard rating system we find all by two facilities to be adequate for insuring life safety. and is satellite illustrates these two as indicated as shr4s

or shr3's. it is important to know that the category provides for the occupants of the facilities to safely egress and not necessarily to allow to resume the normal operation. to achieve unambiguous immediate occupancy or shr1 would require substantial renovation or replacement of a facility. currently the public safety building which is the police headquarter and just the only shr11 among all police facility. next slide please. >> another criterion of particular importance in deciding how to best engage and

as you can expect, a facilities built anywhere from 60 to 100 years ago are not sized to respond to the modern era whether functionally or according to building code standards or as i have just described, the seismic worthy and we have revitalized the guidance with the assistance of expert architect consultants with deep experience among many police departments and working closely with the police command representatives. these guidelines and standards produce a steady report that's been applied to the 2020 projects that i will now present. next slide please. the largest project is the replacement of the engleside location station in district 11.

built over 100, it is half of the area of an ideal modern facility. we believe the size of the replacement facility proposed, though less than the ideal area k provide the necessary functional integrity for the police operations at that elocation. next slide please. the next largest project is the police range with the essential fact that drives this project as a priority project is on the verge of schurl collapse. the large span are open to the sky and you can see photographs of the trusses and have become severely comprised by the exterior exposure. and next slide. and the project is a surge or

interim facility to house the engleside station while it is being replaced. this will be a lease modular buildings at a city appropriate, for example, at the zoo depicted here. sorry, advance to next slide. thank you. or maybe at a lease facility large enough to accommodate the police need. our city's real estate department is currently working on available alternatives. next slide please. the final project is at mission station and from the building defect and next slide please.

and this concludes my presentation. thank you for the opportunity and i am available for any questions you may have. >> i don't see any questions from commissioners. thank you for your presentation. next line item. i think we are supposed to have the commission here and i am not sure if there is any representative. i don't see anybody from the youth commission on. >> this might be a good time that item c will be d sorry 6b on the agenda will be continued to next week. and also many are wearing pink because it is pink patch month. and we will talk about this next week as well. sergeant youngblood, i don't know if you are able to put the information on the screen for folks if they want to donate to

get a patch. there is an email address and a number. that is information that will be up next week as well.

this will be up next week to help support breast cancer. one last call for anyone in the youth commission. let's tall the next line item. >> d.p.a. director's report. it will be limited to a belief description of activities and announcement to calendar the issues raised for future commission meeting. >> you are muted. >> sorry. good evening, commissioners. i have just a brief presentation because i know that we have another presentation we will be

making following this on the direct information and where we are and what we are working on so far. we have had a number of meetings just checking in with from the issues and to make sure that folks and many of the work is taking place remotely and see the numbers have continued to go up. we have continued to close the cases and stay on top of things. we are at 642 cases so far this year that have been open. that is up from this time last year which was 585 cases. in terps of cases that have been closed we have closed a record 704 cases and we have never that i am aware of so u will look

into that and have a better answer for you next week. i am not aware where we have closed as many cases in this time frame. last year we closed 498 cases. in term of pending cases we have 377 open and pending cases and this time last year we had 406. we have sustained 34 of the cases so far this time last year in terms of cases that have been under investigation longer than nine months and that is 29. this time last year we were at 39. we mediated 30 cases this year. last year at this time we were at 27 cases. currently there are 35 cases

that are that are pending with the police commission. we have no cases that are in closed session tonight for d.p.a. discussion and participation and with the outreach and training and a lot of the outreach is virtual. we participated in a stakeholder engagement series to focus on trance organization sharing community resources during the pandemic. we've also participated in the engagement series and stakeholder engagement series specifically with the youth commission. we also have a scheduled know your rights presentation with the youth commission on the 19th

to stay connected and we have had a number of trainings. and the chief of operations pretended and participated in this cmcr that is a mindset response training with the better understanding of what the training is to tie it to the policy recommendations and throughout the year on various topics. and next week i will have as a preview to agendaize or part of the presentation and the overview but i reached out to an independent agency to evaluate dba and make a comparison with the other oversight agencies in t state and the rest of the country. and i wanted to gauge in terms of sharing information, transparency and accountability what the numbers look like as compared to other agency.

i think it will be more useful and help to feel the agencies that grew out of conversations that i was having with to the accountability agency. i should have more information as early as next week. i will stop there. i know we have a presentation on the direct share we will be presented from my office about ongoing issues in terms of sharing information with the department and with that i will conclude my report. >> to put them into contact and i appreciate it. and i wanted to commend you for your ability to really receive constructive criticism and feedback and take it and run with it. and it is telling to open

yourself up to scrutiny and more transparency than you already are by having your numbers and your agency compared to other ones across the nation, so i will commend you on being brave enough to do that because some people aren't willing to take that step. i think that that step is a huge step for your agency and is going to help you become even better and productive criticism and always asking for feedback and to use that to make the agency better. i can tell just by the conversations that we have had with the materials you have been presenting by your attorney, so thank you. >> thank you for saying that. i don't know how well i receive it and to listen and incorporate

it and with the public forums and often times the feedback and the criticism and comes fast and furious. public comment is what it is. we are a public agency and this is a public process. and all of us expose ourselves to the ongoing work at the police commission in a public forum way that is exposed. so that is part of the job and sometimes it's easier than others. frequently especially when we are trying to do new things and trying to address reforms, it is all new. and that doesn't make it less mandatory or less important. at some point it is what it is and here is what the numbers are and here is what the facts are and if it is not well received, the pub lib has a right to know

and the department has a right to know and the commissioners have a duty to know this information. and the pushback you get if and when you guys get pushback from me is coming from a place of difficulty with budgets and personnel, not from a lack of commitment to the vision and the mission. i don't know why i am making a speech. sorry. thank you. sorry. >> thank you. >> it's like you had that written out, paul. >> i got in tv mood. >> there were a lot of feelings in there. >> you know because sometimes it's hard getting that feedback. and i am, like, mmm.

>> definitely roll with the punches. i got to give it to you. it's, like i said, it takes a strong person to be able to say, hey, come examine me and that is what you are doing, so i commend you. >> let's wait until we look at it and then -- >> remember this when we get the results. >> exactly. >> exactly. >> thank you. next line item. >> line item 1d. commissioners' reports. commission discussion will be limited to determining whether to calendar any of the issues raised for a future mission meeting. commission president's report. commissioners' reports. commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration at future commission meeting, action. >> i see no hands in the chat. next line item. >> next line item is public comment on line item one.

at this time the public is welcome to make public comment on line item one. for those who would like to make public comment, call 415-655-0001, access code 146 646 2826 and press pound and pound again. for those online on webex, press star 3 to raise your hand. >> sergeant, since the youth commission didn't happen tonight, let's go 3 minutes for public comment. >> thank you. so far you have two on the phone. >> okay. >> hello, caller. you have three minutes. >> good evening, caller. caller, are you there? you have three minutes.

okay. we will go to the next. good evening, caller. you have three minutes. >> caller: good evening, commissioners. chief scott, and executive director henderson. i am deputy public defender brian cox. after reading the details of the audit electronic communication report, really question the report's utility. it hits in three areas. clets, department email and text messages the out of 362 potential biassed items the audit uncovered the department found that just two were potentially buy biassed. that is only half a percent. while that sounds like a ringing endorsement, the facts on the ground are cutback and suggest that the tool doesn't capture the right data. reviewing electronic communications is important but sfpd can and should devise better tools to accomplish the same objective. how can they do those reports and do they know the search

terms and can it make recommendations or suggest reforms on the process and ask for regular status updates on the investigation of the two potentially biassed hits found in this report? the reports to provide accountability and transparency and boast both laudable and worthy goals and in practice they fall short because there is little transparency in the process or methodology and no visibility accountable as the commission plays a role and refuses a role. and because the auditor report does little work, they should push sfpd to make the audit something that matters or get rid of it and thank you. >> thank you. next caller.

>> caller: this program doesn't -- this program also collects data from devices that aren't on bias sfpd and say, somebody who isn't really related to spfd who sends a text message to an sfpd device and will monitor those text messages or emails. and so how does this program protect the privacy of those individuals who do not consent to be part of this? how -- are they ever notified that the communications are being monitored? i am very concerned about the implications of this. thank you.

awe thank you. anymore callers? >> no. >> all right. next line item. >> line item 2, status report regarding d.b.a., sfpd information sharing agreement. discussion. >> hi, commissioners. >> good evening, vice president taylor, commissioners, chief scott, director henderson. i am sharon wu, the chief of operations at dpa. and i am here with assistant chief to talk about a status update on information sharing. as a way of background, i will tell you that historically there have been challenges in sharing information with the department. most of that has been anecdotal and we have started to detail some of the areas that we would like to share bet we are the department. that was codified in a letter to the commission back on july 14.

the department responded to that letter on august 10. on september 3 we started a series of meetings. and i think through the meetings we isolated the top four that we thought we could deal with earlier, quickly and be able to have common ground in terms of information sharing. and that is the status update and assistant chief mozer and i will be giving you today and knowing this is just a start to what i think will be a much fuller discussion. and something that we hope will be codified in a letter of agreement between the departments so that we can document and identify all of the deeds agreements that we have made. so there is a power point. thank you, agent young blood. next slide please. the four areas that we have identified have been through the intra net and hrms.

a share point document which will track discipline and body worn cameras. chief? i am assistant chief bob mozer. as sharon had mentioned, we have been working on this since early september. and we have some good news to report. we were able to accomplish a number of dba's requests and did so working very collaboratively if i may say so and very quickly on this. so our first big area that we were able to make headway in is with power dms. dba requested access to the department intra net. the intranet program is a very old program that the department is currently phasing out and

replacing with power dms. what we were able to do was grant dpa access to power dms which gives them access to airport, general orders, all department bulletins, department general orders, all manuals and guides, all unit and bureau orders, and all department forms that they had also requested or posted on power dms. and as well all new policies that come out and all new department bulletins that come out are posted on power dms so the dpa will have access to all of those policies as the department does. next slide please. the next major area where we were able to make quite a bit of headway is access to hmrs which is the human resource management system.

dpa had requested several areas to access hrms and dpa has access to job data, daily assignment, employee scheduling -- go back there -- thank you. employee scheduling history, officer activity, and officer training histories. so that gives them the ability to look up in real time and future time officer assignments. they also were able to run reports. those reports include reports of based on rank of all rosters, watch off calendar, monthly activity reports, employee work history, unit station seniority, and unit seniority as well. it can also run training summaries as well. i think that's updated. another areas that they have access to is department a

numbers which is a unique identifier assigned to each department employee. [please stand by]

it will be -- we will be able to identify both case numbers when cases have been sent to the department, when the department has given hopefully a letter of intent to discipline. from that point we can track whether or not discipline is imposed, whether it was referred to the commission and any appellate process that goes through that as well. we'll also be able to identify

when potentially dpa's recommendation was either agreed upon, because lower or higher than that. and i think that annual report will retract discipline, will be much more complete i think is a better word, and that there will be the ability for both the department and dta to add information and track those together. hopefully i'm encouraging the commission to have another status with us so that we can report on the further progress that we've been making, and so i'm hoping in another couple of months we'll have this up and running and we can show you a finished product. >> ask and you shall receive. >> thank you very much, vice-president taylor. next slide? so there are areas that we haven't been able to come to

agreement with. and it isn't for want of trying. body-worn camera is one of them, and also put in there daes warehouse. currently police accountability is not considered a law enforcement agency pursuant to the department of justice. there is inadvertent material that is criminal information that is regulated by doj that may show up on body-worn camera. that is potentially showing the screen, the computer screen in the patrol vehicles. viewable information from dispatch that would give criminal information that a law enforcement agency is not allowed to have through doj. and so we can't have direct access to evidence.com. that has been the department's position. i don't have any reason to think that that is not true.

from my experience in my former job at the da's office, i know that the department has had some audits on d.o.j., and because of some of the issues, the d.a.'s office got their own license, and so i think that is true. we have talked about possible solutions. one of them, a huge solution would be identifying civilian oversight agencies with law enforcement agencies so that we could have this sort of inadvertent access to material. that's a state-wide solution, and nothing that we can deal with in the now, the current. another area would be to contact d.o.j. to see whether or not this inadvertent access would not be a violation of the police department class license, and i have a call in to d.o.j. i have to say that i am not --

i'm not optimistic that that will be something that d.o.j. will agree to, and so we're trying to consider workarounds. one would be d.p.a. getting their own evidence.com license. that -- sharing but it would still require the department to get each one of our requests through the bode worn camera and redact and ensure that no -- information is on that body-worn camera, and that really is the bigger delay. and there are also cost concerns about getting our own evidence.com license. it is costly. it's expensive, and the storage that is necessary is also costly. so that's one of the things that we are working on, and again, which i would ask the commission to have us update them when we come back in a couple of months. next slide, please. so i do want to say that, you

know, the pandemic has had such incredible and horrific things happening with society, but one of the -- i don't even want to call it benefits, but one of the things that it forced us to do, like we're having virtual meetings, it forced us to share in different ways, and i think the new way we're sharing with the department has increased the efficiency and increased effectiveness in that sharing. one of them is that we have now a single point of contact with the department. we can send one person in the department our requests for records. that person then will disseminate those requests to other places in the department, whether it's the district station or legal one area. one person being responsible, one person that we need to contact to ensure that we have sent it to the right place, one person who is responsible for getting us the information back as opposed to every district station, several people at every district station. i think this is much more

efficient and effective. and then the second part is that we have now gone completely electronic with the department. we make our requests electronically. we receive our information electronically. we used to use the fax machine which i am -- you know, i'm astounded, it was so ineffective and so inefficient, and so i think that this use of electronically making our requests and electronically receiving the information is a huge upgrade in the way that we share and we receive information. and this will become a permanent way that we do things. next slide, please. and then there are some no access to information, and we had asked for many our letter access to the e-stop data, and the department had told us, and we had seen it through some of the d.o.j. materials, that they no longer use e-stop. and perhaps ac moesier can expand a little bit about that

and the type of information that e-stop data used to have and where it goes now and how we would be able to access it. >> e-stop -- thank you, sharon. e-stop data was a precursor to our state claim requirement when we have the state reporting requirement, ripa, went into effect. we now transmit our data directly to the state so all data is stored at the state level, not the department level. >> and so for d.p.a. to access that material, we would have to ask d.o.j., which we would intend to do should we need it. and then one of the last bigger-ticket items was the internal affairs remote cards, and those are only available upon request, but since our requesting procedure is much more efficient, we think we won't have issues receiving responses on the card requests. and i will report back in a

couple of months if we have any issues at all. next slide, please. and so really this is the end of our presentation. in the last six or eight weeks i think that we have come a long way in understanding and in sharing the information sharing that's necessary between the departments. i know that ac moser and i are going to work on a letter of agreement which would codify all of these agreements. i thank the commission tremendously for their help. phil lowhouse has been part of all our discussions and he's kept us on track, and i think that was really important in this process. and if there's any questions or any comments at all, i'd love to hear them. >> thank you. i have one question and then we will turn it over to other commissioners. i remember when i first joined this commission and i first learned that you guys didn't have clets access, which to me is just crazy, and it's a little bit disappointing that, you

know, d.o.j. is part of the call for reform and pushing reforms and managing the reform process but at the same time denying d.p.a. clets access to -- would help bring the reform process to fruition. so can you tell me more about what you plan to do if there's anything the commission can do? i think it's just so much more difficult for you to do your job without access to clets information sna . >> you know, i would take any assistance the commission is willing to give us, and the weight of the commission, especially in speaking with d.o.j. in order to identify civilian agencies or law enforcement agencies we'd have to change the statute because they have identified all the law enforcement agencies within the statute. so it would have to be something this would include d.p.a., oversight agencies in general to be considered a law enforcement

agency to be allowed the type of access that other law enforcement agencies have. i don't know exactly what it would take for d.o.j. to say sharing this inadvertent information would not be a violation of the clets agreements that the department has with d.o.j. to use all of these systems. it is part of an audit that they do regularly. they have to be able to identify who's using what to see if there's any improper use, so i understand that, but i will -- i will put on my thinking cap, vice-president taylor, and i will work with ac moser to try to come up with some other solutions. i do think that one of our biggest challenges is the time that it takes to get vwc and to be reviewing that as well. i think access to criminal histories is less since most of our investigations, you know,

are not geared toward criminal, obviously, investigations. so it really is bwc access and the inadvertent access to criminal history information. i will definitely -- we're definitely working on it, and i will let the commission know how it can be helpful and hope that you will support us in our efforts to be able to get direct access. >> thank you. commissioner? >> i think director henderson had his hand up, so maybe he should speak first. >> okay. oh, yeah, he -- i was just taking you guys in order. director henderson, feel free to go first. you're muted. sna sorry. i don't know how to wave my hand on this thing. i went through the whole thing trying to figure out, and then i was like, let me just put a question. i just wanted to follow up on a couple of things that were raised and just frame some of the context from the presentation, especially with the clets stuff.

and asking around to my peers from other counties and seeing how they address this problem, they had a different approach from their city attorneys office who was the holder, who would meter out a lot of the information with their clets. but as ms. woo said, we are looking at solutions that are internal and external, which would allow possible legislative solutions, either at a local or a state level as well. so that's part of where we're going. and i just wanted to frame, you know, it looks like a lot is being done, but it really is so much more because a lot of the issues that were in that letter that was culminated from july 14 from my agency have been a long time coming, and these have been long-standing issues back and forth about having -- trying to get information from the department, and including

updating the d.p.a.'s own records. a lot of our own records, and this is part of the digitalization process. as you recall, much of our records, we were photocopying and sending things back and forth in the mail and on faxes 40 to 50 documents a day back and forth, and that was the cornerstone of the henderson report. and as we started digitalizing our process, the need to have that information from the department i think increased, but also was easier because information was available digitally and could have been shared more easily, and so my point is that there have been many years of leading up to this that led to the july 14, and a lot of work has been done in the past, in the past six to eight weeks to address many of the delayed investigations or blocked investigations because information, we either didn't have or weren't sure of how to

ask or who to ask it for. it wasn't that attempts weren't being made, but this is attempting to solve all of these things all in one fell swoop, and so it's groundbreaking that this is being done right now, but i would say that it is still somewhat incomplete, and i think both of the -- both of us have alluded to that, both myself and moser also say that there's still more work to be done. and so again, i'd like to come back and present again when we have a better l.o.a. and i can have an update on the clets stuff for all of you as well, and then we'll see just where we are, but i do want to keep this moving forward. a lot really has been done, but let's see how it works and plays out while we sort through things and then we'll just see in a couple -- i don't know how much time you guys want to give it. i would say -- i would think just knowing or having a better

sense of what the issues are, both from the presentation and knowing what the requests have been in the past, that it would need at least one or two months, but i'm open to whatever the commission wants to hear. however the commission wants to hear it. we'll come back whenever, but i would think that it needs at least two months, not just to set it up, but to give it time to see if it's actually working, if information is being translaid, and if we're able to get the information too. >> if we put it on the december 2 agenda, that enough time? that's a month and a half. >> either way you'll have a substantive update, i believe, and i'll let moser and woo answer that directly, but a lot -- so much has been done already in just these past few weeks, i can't imagine you wouldn't get helpful information. i just don't know if that's enough time for them to give a

more substantive l.o.a. they can answer. >> i'm sorry, vice-president taylor. i'm actually not going to be here on the 2nd, so i would appreciate it if we go a week later. >> that's fine. >> is that an answer? >> so the 9th it would be. i think, chief moser, does that work for you? >> yeah. i think so. i think working on an l.o.a. certainly on everything that we have agreed to and presented tonight, i think that's absolutely a possibility and it will give us time to see how everything has been working, how our sharing of information through our case sharing information is working. so i think we'll have a good idea by then. >> thank you. commissioner elias? >> thank you.

i'm really happy to hear of all the progress that's been happening, and i also do want to join in on this -- thank you to phil because he has been an integral part of this and has really been trying to move things along. i'm glad that we will be bringing this back for another update. one of the things that i wanted to also perhaps have you address at the next meeting is if these issues are not able to be worked out, what are the interim solutions? i know that you're working on the sharepoint. i know the bwc is an issue, but i still think that things like the bwc may be a longer process to resolve, so there should be measures in place in the interim to make sure that this information is being exchanged in a more expeditious manner. so i would like you also to just keep that in mind as well, and

again, i appreciate the efforts on both sides to get this moving. >> thank you. i don't see any other questions from commissioners, so unless the presenter has more, i'll call the next line item, and thank you for your time and look forward for when you come back. >> thank you. good evening. >> thank you. >> next line item is public comment on line item two. at this time the public is now welcome to make public comment on line item two. call 415-665-0001 access code 146-646-2826. those already logged on, please press star 3 to raise your hand. you have one caller. good evening, caller, you have three minutes. >> oh, i wasn't in the queue, as far as i know.

i'm sorry. >> no problem. >> okay. next line item? >> next line item, line item three, general public comment. at this time the public is now welcome address the commission for up to three minutes

bloop enter int >> i'm sandra lee fewer, chair of this body, joined by commissioners gordon mar, matt haney, cynthia pollock, and shanti singh. i like to thank maya her man -- hernandez for broadcasting this meeting. do we have any announcements? >> to protect our commissioners, city employees, and the public, city hall is closed. lafco members will be participating in the meeting remotely. this is pursuant to the various state and local orders and directives. commissioners will participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were physically present. public comment will be available on each item on this agenda via

telephone. both channel 26 and sfgov.org are streaming the number across the screen. you can call 415-655-0001, meetimee meeting id is (146) 354-7117, then pound and pound again. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussions, but you will be muted and in listening mode only. press star 3 to be added to the speaker line. best practices are to call from a quiet location, and speak slowly and clearly and turn down your television or video. you can submit public comments

by e-mails me, the lafco clerk or by u.s. mail. it will be forwarded to the members and included as part of the official file. madam clerk, that concludes my announcements. >> thank you very much madam clerk. can you please call item number two. >> item number two, approval of lafco minutes from september 18, 2020, regular meeting. >> those who wish to provide public comment should call the number on your screen, meeting id146-354-7117. if you have not already done so,

please dial star 3 to line up to speak. is there anyone in line waiting to speak on this item? >> madam chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> seeing that, public comment is now closed on item number two. i would like to make a motion to approve the lafco minutes for the regular meeting. can i have a second please. >> second. >> roll call vote please. >> item number two, vice chair pollock. >> aye. >> commissioner haney. >> aye. >> commissioner mar. >> aye. >> chairperson fewer. >> aye. >> there are four ayes. >> thank you very much. madam clerk, can you please call item number three. >> community choice aggregation

activities report. a, enrollment and service statistics, b, update on delinquency and bill assistance for low income customers. c, grant proposal to demonstrate a virtual power plant. d, power charge indifference adjustment. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted to begin your comments. >> thank you very much. today we have barbara hale from sfpuc. the floor is yours. >> thank you very much. good morning commissioners, barbara hale presenting to you today. i like to move to slide two please, where we're going to give a quick overview of the agenda that we're going to cover today. you can see as the commission secretary announced the items. let's move into enrollment and service statistics. slide four please.

at complete community wide enrollment, cleanpowersf now has a little over 409,000 customer accounts. since launch, 3.9 percent of those customer accounts enrolled have opted out of the program. that is still a 96% retention rate, so we're happy with that. despite the challenges presented by covid, the upgrade rate has remained steady at 2%. finally, the receipt -- recent june 2020 enrollment is completed with a 1.2% opt out rate, just for that individual enrollment. that gives you a sense of how the program is doing. slide five please. i like to move on to talk about delinquent sit and bill assistance for customers. it's a tough time for san

franciscan s. we reported that the sfpuc adopted a bill credit for qualifying customers enrolled in the california alternative rates for energy and family electricity rate assistance program. that's a state program and federal program. these are bill assistance programs. we've adopted a bill credit for qualifying customers enrolled in these programs by the end of september. the proposed bill credit would cover an average electricity bill for a care or fera can you tells -- customer for one month. it's being applied this month, october. it provides economic relief for these customers and an opportunity for us to promote enrollment in care and fera discount programs. we're excited about that because that provides qualifying customers with ongoing assistance, not just one time.

it's at least a 20% discount on their energy bills. we taken this as a marketing moment, a leveraging moment, to make sure that if people qualify, they get themselves enrolled. slide seven please. at the last meeting, commissioner fewer, you asked for more information regarding account delink went sit by supervisor district. what you see on this slide summarizes delinquency data business supervisor district. we did a heat map where you can see the delinquencies are the highest in red and gradients down to green where they're lowest. >> i don't think we're seeing that slide in front of us. >> that is slide seven and i believe they're managing the slides. it's showing on the sf tv

screen. i'm not sure why you're not seeing it. >> we're seeing a different slide. >> i'm asking for slide seven please. there. i'm not managing the slide presentment. so now you're seeing the heat map presentation that i just mentioned. maybe we want to stay on that slide for a moment so you can absorb the content. >> sure. >> just for folks who are listening in, that's the slide we're looking at or showing, so is that correct in supervisor

haney's district there. >> that's what we're seeing, 51% for folks that are overdue on paying their bills up to 30 days. for 60 days, it drops down to 16%. then for district six, we're showing it drops down to 10%. so understand that what we're seeing here is an aging process, right? you can be delinquent for 30 days but then cure it so you don't show it on the 60 day column here. that's why the percentage delinquent dropped overtime. you can see that we do a

delinquent sit rate around 6% and as presented on this slide, that represents about a $2 million under collection for the program. the average delinquency of $101. thank you commissioner fewer for folks who aren't able to see the screen. i appreciate that reminder. >> thank you, please proceed. >> there's been an increase in enrollment in the care and fera program within our cleanpowersf customer base. so prior to shelter-in-place for covid-19, which occurred in march, march 17th. we all remember that date. we had about 38,000 enrollments. that's about 10% of active cleanpowersf customer accounts.

as of the end of september, our preliminary numbers show that our enrollment in those two bill assistance programs has increased to 50,660. that represents a 30% increase in enrollment in these programs since march. that's now representing about a 13% total of our customer accounts being enrolled in these programs. we're continuing to work with this data and we will provide financial results with our effort to get more folks enrolled at the november lafco meeting or i believe that's your next meeting. so if we could move to slide nine then. i'm happy to share that since the last lafco meeting, our sfpuc staff collaborate with the department of environment to submit a grant. this is an application to the u.s. department of energy to develop a pilot, virtual power

plant at affordable housing buildings that our customers of cleanpowersf. slide ten please. the u.s. department of energy grant opportunity is offering $1 million grant with total funding of 10 million available to fund projects that have the potential to significantly reduce energy and u.s. commercial or multifamily buildings. the department of energy was looking for projects that could demonstrate end use demand flexibility to improve power grid efficiencies and generate and dissimilate data on building technologies. the funding is available for up to three years and grant applications were due september 28th. slide 11 please. the grant application we submitted would leverage hot water heat pumps and other integrated demand side measures across ten tenderloin

neighborhoods, multiunit properties. so we're focusing on the multi-unit aspect of the department of energy's offerings. this new equipment would convert natural gas usage to electricity usage. we're hoping to do some de-carbonization and we'll also then allow the building managers to flexible respond to hourly price signals. to establish the price signals, the project team will develop a tool to determine the value of the electricity demand flex blth on buildings based on cleanpowersf avoided energy procurement cost. under the grant proposal, we will recruit flexible demand aggregator, a third party capable of optimizing building energy demands and response to hourly signals. so the idea here is that a building could be dispatched, turned on and off. the energy consumption would

increase and decrease based on pricing in the market, much like we procure energy in the market. we would be procuring demand reduction. so, let's move to slide 12 please. so through this grant application, we're trying to demonstrate the ability to decarbonize domestic hot water systems and verify the financial benefits of building electrification. we're proposing to create an avoided cost tool to determine the value of electricity demand flexibility. we'll then use the avoided cost values to send a price signal to the building's energy manager to change the electricity usage in response to wholesale cost of electricity supply to provide that flexibility, the project would integrate distributed energy resources from multifamily buildings portfolios

to a virtual power plant and analyze data collected from the operation of those resources to validate the virtual power plant's performance. so ultimately this project will assess the viability of cost pricing to promote distributed energy resources as a substitute for supply side resources. slide 13 please. here is the projected, the project's expected schedule. we're expecting to hear back from the department of energy on the application in january of 2021. assuming we are awarded a grant, we anticipate contract negotiations and executions during the first quarter of 2021 and then we move on to phase one of the project, commencing in the second quarter of 2021. during this market assessment and technology installation phase, we will identify existing

tenderloin neighborhood development corporation sites with appropriate energy aspects to include in the program. we will install heat pumps, measure and verify the greenhouse gas savings in the parenting buildings, created the avoided cost tool i talked about and procure the flexibility demand aggregator. phase two, which will focus on the program implementation is expected to commence in 2022 and run through 2023. this work will include calculation of the demand flexibility savings for all the buildings, create a pool of non-participant comparison groups, so we have something to benchmark against, set up and manage automated meter infrastructure to facilitate the data transfer, and calculate our ongoing demand flexibility savings and the payment for ongoing demand flexibility.

finally in phase three, occurring in the first quarter of 2024, we'll focus on project analysis andy sim -- and desimulation of results and findings. now power charge and difference adjustments. are there any questions about the virtual power plant? >> any comments or questions from my colleagues? seeing no one in the queue, please proceed. >> thank you, thank you. so shifting gears. at the last meeting, excuse me, our director mike hines, deputy director for cleanpowersf presented an overview and updated the commission on the power charge indifference adjustment. this is the exit fee all of our customers pay. we have a couple updates for you this week. slide 15 please. first, i want to recognize that

at the last meeting, a group of administrators have coordinated to prepare a letter for elected officials representing their communities. to voice the concern about the pcia to the california puc commissioners regarding the pcia price volatility and high costs and how they're harming all electricity customers in the state, i want to thank lafco commissioners for your support of this letter, which was sent to the california puc on september 24th and featured the signatures of 99 elected officials representing energy programs. those signatures included mayor london breed and all 11 members of the san francisco board of supervisors. they asked them to implement common sense fixes to increase transparency by adopting new rules to allocate resources to

retail sellers whose customers pay for them and encourage better management of utilities portfolios and give consumers more information about what the fees pay for. so thank you very much for your support for that letter. finally, if we'll move to slide 16 please. on september 28, pg&e filed an application seeking to recover a $252 million, in the indifference adjustment. pg&e is proposing to collect this money over a 12 month period, starting in 2021. if that request is approved by the california p.u.c., then the pcia is expected to rise by a total of 1 cent per kilo watt hour in 2021. we're working with other community choice programs to

request a longer collection period of 36 months to reduce the impact on rate payers in 2021. while this request will not address the underlying causes of the problem with the pcia, those issues will need to be addressed through new rules requiring better management of the electrical corporation, the portfolio. it will provide important near term rate relief to cleanpowersf and other community choice aggregation customers. that could have a significant impact on program participation. with that, i think that's my final slide if you will advance. i'll be happy to take any questions. >> thank you ms. hale. any questions or comments from my colleagues at all? seeing none, let's open this up for public comment please.

>> okay, thank you madam chair. members of the public who wish to speak on this item press star 3 now to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate that you raised your hand. please wait until you have been unmuted and then you can begin your comments. operations, is there anyone in line to provide public comment on this item? madam chair -- >> yes madam chair -- >> how many people are in the queue? >> we currently have two people in line. >> okay. i see that the advocates are asking to extend public comments to three minutes for all items. since we have on average two speakers for public comment on each item, i think i will grant that today.

so please set the time for three minutes for each public speaker and we can start public comment now on item number three only. thank you. >> okay. thank you madam chair. can you send the first caller through please. >> hello commissioners, can you hear me? >> yes, we can. >> okay, good. eric brooks, california for energy choice and san francisco clean energy advocate. on the pcia fee, i mean it's great that we're asking for an extension on how long that's to be paid off, but really we got to get more -- the cities that are community choice cities need to go at war with the california public utilities on this. if we don't, then they're going

to keep doing this to us until our community choice programs are dead. so we got to really declare war and cities need to get organized and do something about this so that it can't continue. this charge is unnecessary. it's been in place for decades and it's time to phase it out completely. very importantly, on the grant proposal from the federal government, i think that sounds like it's going to be. >> worthy program and it's very useful. it will give us great data, but i also think it's really important that we not get trap in the verbiage that the federal government is giving us that this is a "virtual power plant" demonstration. a virtual power plant, when advocates talk about virtual power plants, what we're talking about is building renewable, demand response, efficiency, and other things as described in the grant proposal so that together all these things in an entire

region completely fulfill the electricity needs of the community in such that they don't need fossil fuel power plants anymore. it's like you have a 24 hour power plant on seven days a week. that's a virtual power plant. i want to make sure we don't get off on the wrong foot with this presentation, on this worthy grant proposal and call that a virtual power plant when it isn't one. so i just want to make sure to put that clarification forward. those are my comments. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. can you please put the next caller through. >> thank you very much. [inaudible] >> i want to thank you for the presentation and thank chair fewer for the allocation of time. sometimes it's very useful, which is why we ask for it, but

i will not use it on this item. i really just want to say you know, my major point is that the pcia fee going up the way it has in the last five years is normal business, like what we've been seeing nationally over the last several years with legislation restricting voting. it's normal democracy. it's something that should be called out and stop being treated as business as usual. to that end, i guess i would say that the normal process is sending a couple lobbyist to handle things at the sfpuc is probably not a winning strategy. i would base that on us getting rolled many years now as you saw from mr. hines presenting the pcia shipping money out of the city that was presented at your last meeting. so what i would suggest is that

the city pursue a legislative fix. the senator is really good on energy and pcia issues. he is very familiar with the pcia. we pursue a legislative fix that forces them to do xy or z, rather than engaging in their regulatory process. we have been dealing with this problem for years. it's not getting any better. we acted in good faith. i trust that the government affairs folks have acted in good faith. pg&e has not. i guess to eric's term, i think it is time that we dial up the confrontational antagonism on this particular item. we as the city and county cannot afford -- i mean we're talking about care and fera expansion

while we're shipping tens of millions of dollars out of the city every year. we can't afford to keep doing this. thank you for your time. >> thank you for your comments. does that complete the queue? >> madam chair, that completes the queue. >> okay, public comment is now closed on item number three. let's move on then, there is no action needed on this item. madam clerk, can you please call item number four. >> item number four, renewable energy consultant update. a, cleanpowersf integrated resource plan response update. b, northern california cca benchmarking report. c, upcoming tasks. meeting id146-354-7117, then pound and pound again. if you haven't done so, please press star three to line up to

speak. a system prompt will have indicate you raised your hand. please wait until public comment is called and the system indicates you have been unmuted to begin your comments. >> thank you very much. today we have with us jenny whitson and nicole amweg. the floor is yours. >> thank you and good morning commissioners. this is jenny whitson and i will be presenting some renewable energy consultant updates. so will i be sharing my screen or will you be sharing the slides? perfect, okay. okay, next slide. so today we'll be giving you an update on the cleanpowersf i.r.p. responses following the last regular monthly meeting for lafco in september. i will also be presenting the northern california benchmarking exercise we performed last month

and then we will be describing our upcoming tasks. next slide. so for the 2020i.r.p. review that we performed and provided a presentation last month, since then we had met with the executive officer of lafco and cleanpowersf staff as well to discuss some of the comments that we provided in our recommendations to provided additional clarification to their staff, as well as reviewing some of their comments that they provided back, that we provided to the commission. they also provided a written response on october 8th that we reviewed and addressed as well in our recent memo, also issued on october 8th to the commission. that's really in response to our formal feedback that we submitted to cleanpowersf staff and sfpuc on august 21st to our original memo when we provided our preliminary feedback.

next slide. so, we wanted to provide an update since the last lafco meeting we presented, this slide. cleanpowersf provided a few clarifications to the graphics on their website and some of these tables listed in the i.f.p. i wanted to highlight that the green percentages under existing projects, as well as the overall portfolio with the preferred case has been updated. so 10% of cleanpowersf existing projects are locate in the local bay area and out of the new projects presented, 24% which hasn't changed, will be located in that area. when you combine the two of those and their new projects, 12% of cleanpowersf's total portfolio will be located in the bay area. we want to note that because it's the nature of power purchase agreement and the term va varying, the percentages will

fluctuate over the years. next slide. so, we did provide some specific follow up in guidance regarding reliability and resiliency to the cleanpowersf team. we discussed some different strategies, such as providing some best practices that other ccas are incorporating into their solicitation process and we also suggested that cleanpowersf provide some requirements in their solicitation process that involve resiliency framework and some scoring for any proposed project that they are considering. we also talked about some innovative solutions for pilot projects, which ms. hale just presented on, which we're really excited to hear about. we also talked about power, the public safety power shutoff events and how they're not currently impacting san

francisco, however, cleanpowersf will develop a communication protocol if they do impact any of their energy supply systems or assets. we talked about that at length. as well, they did provide something that we wanted to highlight to the commissioners regarding the pg&e wholesale distribution tariff, which they highlighted to us. so this is filed september 15th and if passed, it could prevent barriers to distribute resourcing a allegation and distributed storage. so that could present some challenges that staff is monitoring coming up. next slide please. so under our cost analysis comments, the rate analysis value presented a cost for repairs. they con i remember if -- confirmed their rates are required to be between 1% of the generation rates.

they did include the investment tax credit. sfpuc staff are exploring how they can implement the self generation program within san francisco and support participation by cleanpowersf customers, so that was one of our recommendations that they look into further. next slide. so under the cleanpowersf program, cleanpowersf we requested a timeline of the programs and their rollout of how they plan to be developed and implemented to clarify when they will be available for customers. so, they did clarify in their memo that the applications for the disadvantaged communities is submitted by january 1, 2021. they estimate the approval will take approximately six months. so we'll keep the lafco

commission updated as that progress progresses, as well as cleanpowersf equity working group is developing an equity framework which has been discussed in previous meetings. they said that will be integrated into all aspects of cleanpowersf operations. we saw in our benchmarking that a lot of cities across california have equity frameworks in place and they're currently developing them as well. next slide. so the cleanpowersf and lafco executive officers, the teams have accepted our collaboration in the last few weeks. we requested a 12 month look ahead from their staff to help better understand the key milestones coming down the pipeline and help us align our tasks and activities that we perform as renewable energy consultants and cleanpowersf is

going to add mr. goebel to their public bid notification for requests for offers and r.s.p.s. so he will be notified and our team will be notified at the same time when those solicitations are issued. we also talked about implementing a file sharing platform to have better access to reports scheduled and other key documents, to share between cleanpowersf staff and lafco. that way we can definitely see what's coming down the pipeline and reduce the amount of attachments to e-mails and whatnot. so we're exploring how the i.t. team can implement that for lafco. with that, i'm going to hand it off to my colleague nicole to explain benchmarking. >> excuse me, if i could interrupt you for a moment. barbara hale has her hand up to

speak. did you want to add something? >> thank you commissioner fewer. i wanted to note that i believe on slide 13, you have a typo. you're talking about the effect of pg&e's request to modify a wholesale distribution tariff. i think you used the frame that it prevents barriers and it actually presents, not prevents. so that was a key issue that i wanted to make sure the commission understood that filing by pg&e is problematic for the city. >> thank you. >> thank you very much for bringing that to our attention. you may continue. >> thank you ms. hale for that clarification and we'll double check the memo we received because we may need to clarify that to cleanpowersf staff. nicole, would you like to present the benchmarking? >> yes, thank you jenny.

again, i'm nicole amweg. i want to thank you for your time and letting us present our findings with regards to benchmarking this morning. next slide. so to jump in, our team compared cleanpowersf with their counterparts within the same reason with the clean energy option program. it provides a show of context and status of cca in northern california and can be used to identify gaps in order to achieve a competitive advantage over pg&e. please note that this information presented is aware of where the ccas are currently. next slide. so we bench march cleanpowersf to five others that we felt were

most relevant, including marine clean energy, sonoma clean power, et cetera. they thought it's most important to compare against the same investor company, pg&e. we thought it would be good to have a baseline to compare apples to apples. so these are the key ones we decided to benchmark. so we captured cca's launch years. if you look at the top row of the table, you see 2010 through 2019. please note that mce is the first cca in california and the newest being san jose clean energy with the average launch year 2015. you see the number of rate payers listed. the number is approximately

375,000 and cleanpowersf is at 380,000. the number of programs in place with another kpi and you will see the average number is 11. we benchmarked a number of staff, and the average being 34. the existing portfolio size, cleanpowersf at 508 megawatts. we have east bay community at 550. and we have san jose at 1,000. and peninsula clean energy at 400 megawatts. so note that the total only reflects the long-term serving their customers and the average is 738 megawatts. so the average customer

enrollment can be proportionate to each other. next slide. so clean power is on par compare to the northern california cca with the programs offered to customers or in development. we have current staff size and the portfolio size is based on customer sizing usage. the average is 738 megawatts as state in the previous slide. cleanpowersf is at 508 megawatts and growing. each cca aims to match consumption and customer usage. so although cleanpowersf has a large number of customer accounts, a substantial portion of the energy and demand not captured under the cca is the energy consumption from the city and county's buildings. next slide. so an effort to compare and pair up the current 2020 joint rate

mailer to illustrate the various options offered to the residential customers. this compared the ccas and included pg&e for comparison. the total electricity cost include generation costs and pg&e generation delivery of power, the franchise fee surcharge. so the details in this table show each cca's renewable energy mix, the free content and electricity rate. on this table, you'll see that east bay community energy and marin offer three pricing tiers. so the only ones that benchmarked that offer a renewable energy option. so for mce, the local is limited to 300 customers and it promotes the clean economy.

mce eeshgs local option enforces solar energy within that service territory with their program. so evergreen options, it utilizes solar by day and geothermal by night. so the four projects are enrolled in their program. >> so are we having a technical difficulty? >> i'll pick up where she left

off. she may have internet connections issues. so there are different local opti options. so basically they're able to use solar by day and geothermal by night. >> commissioner pollock has her hand up, do you have a question about this or comment? >> yes, i was just noticing the different programs available. do we have the opt in rates for evergreen, eco 100, do you know? do you know what their rates are for their 100% renewable product? >> that information is not as publicly available for each.

some do advertise that and cleanpowersf does a good job in describing that publicly. we're not able to find all that information out from each of the ccas. >> would that be available with something like a sunshine request or maybe if it's publicly available or not publicly posted? >> we can definitely request that and follow up. we did want to point out that the clean energy program, it's capped at 300 customers. so for that one, that would be easier to get. we will track down that information for you. >> and i'm more interested in their green rates, just to compare to the super green

option, which is to be low here. >> okay. >> thank you. >> sure. next slide. >> hi there jenny, i'm back on. i apologize. let me jump in here. thank you for your time and patience here. so for this slide, here we wanted to point out cca similarities which include pg&e delivery rates and the total cost of electricity rates. our research shows that cleanpowersf exceeds other northern california ccas by offering free content for their first tier, which is the green option, at 96%. one question raise second-degree that the cleanpowersf rate is higher than pg&e's total electricity rate, which they're

comparable second tier. this makes cleanpowersf super green higher than pg&e's comparable option which is a bulk 100% clean energy mix. so san jose clean energy and peninsula clean energy were more competitive to pg&e's solar choice rate. so next slide please. so northern california's cca offers an average of 11 out of 31 programs, based on the tracks or what they track. the cleanpowersf has 6 active programs, 7 more programs in development, 2 focused on disadvantaged community programs, which is administered by p.u.c. cleanpowersf submit add grant application a virtual power plant. it's similar to east bay clean energy, who is currently working with the solar company sun run to deploy.

so, next slide please. some potential programs that are applicable to cleanpowersf that other ccas offer include the battery storage incentive, free e.v. charging equipment, and energy resiliency audit programs. m.c.e.s help customers apply for the incentive program, which is administered by the p.u.c. and it covers 35% to 100% cost to purchase the system. customers pay up front for 50% of the charge or cost and once installed, sonoma clean power reimburses the customer. mce is even including the resiliency criteria for disadvantaged and low income communities and gaap cost coverage. our memo goes into more details

on this program. with that, i'm going to pass it off to jenny and she'll finish this up. >> thanks nicole. so in general we wanted to summarize on the next slide. what we found when we were benchmarking and looking into all our research is that most of the ccas do have a little more information and accessibility on their web based content such as their profiles. there are several meeting notes and information regarding different committees and add hock committees that they have posted publicly available, as well as planning and recording documents such as strategic plans, annual impact reports and other ways to communicate status. also, they provide information such as power notifications and

important dates. that's something we saw the theme across the board and lot of this information may be posted on the website because of the nature of these, but we believe there could be more information posted on cleanpowersf's website. next slide. to wrap up, we just wanted to report out what we'll be working on in the next few months. so following this meeting, we will follow up on any action items and look at the opt out rate for our next benchmarking exercise in six months, as well as next month we plan on providing feedback to the commission on the local renewable energy report. with that, we would like to open it up for questions. >> thank you very much commissioner pollock? >> i just wanted to clarify that the request that i made was an opt in rate instead of an opt out rate. so opting into 100% renewable.

>> thank you very much. any comments or questions from commissioners? i have one, i am wondering are we doing any sort of analysis around our procurement and the measures that we require when we're procuring renewable energy, do we give any extra points to companies that actually institute community benefit? we heard about a new green economy and how this economy can help us bridge the wealth gap. so i'm wondering if any ccas actually, and when they're procuring renewable energy, if they're looking at companies that actually invest in these types of programs to do training or looking at local hire, those types of things. >> i will say that when we were looking at different ones on

other cca websites, there were some requirements or preferred recommendations that they would like those things to be considered. i do not know exactly off the top of my head if they're adding additional points or how those are weighted. we can look into that. if ms. hale wants to provide any feedback on what cleanpowersf is actively doing, that would be great. >> i think as consumption grows and we will procure more renewable energy and since we're looking at 12% is generated within the bay area, if we had a local hire measure, something that would be a more desirable, you know, aspect of when we use our procurement dollars for a greater good or to bridge also sort of what we believe in san francisco values and also i

think the board of supervisors. so i think that would be super helpful. let's hear from any other commissioners. seeing none, can we open this up for public comment please? >> yes madam chair. operations is checking to see if we have any callers in the queue. please let us know if any callers are ready. if you haven't done so, please press star 3 to be added. for those on hold, please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. is there anyone in line? >> yes, i have two callers in the queue. i will queue the first caller. >> madam chair, are we still doing three minute? >> yes, please. thank you madam clerk. >> hello again commissioners, eric brooks. thank you for the presentation. i want to preface this bay -- by

saying we think you're doing great work. it's great that you're communicating with the sfpuc and you will be reporting back on creating that great communication with lafco, but also do include in your report back the interactions you had with advocates in the community and how you are responding to their recommendations and questions. then i want to reiterate what i said previously, which is that the small grant programs are not really virtual power plants and we need to be careful not to call them that. we need a real region wide website that will fuel us completely without energy coming out of the city. so that gets me to what i want to emphasize. so i think so many are hoping that the democrats win the

presidential election this november and it's looking positive for that to happen. however, we have to remember that both joe biden and his vice presidential running mate kamala harris has said emphatically we will not ban fracking. that is the last red flag that the planet needs that the federal government of the united states is not going to solve the climate crisis problem and that it is on us in our local communities to do it. that means we need benner to get a virtual power plant plan on the table with an r.f.p. next year so the board can vote for it and pass it next year. the federal government is out to lunch on this, regardless of who becomes the next president. we have to get this underway next year. we can't wait any longer to get this plan on the table and get

it voted on by the board of supervisors. thank you. >> thank you for your comment. may we have the next speaker? >> thank you very much. i just want to also thank benner for the work and there are good items here that we have never thought of and good items that we have been thinking for a long time. it's good to see them all. looking at extending program operations is an important priority for 350 bay area. we would like all of them to be the best they can be. i appreciate taking a systemic look antidotally we're familiar with programs in silicon clean energy, which is not include in the benchmarking. hopefully that could be included for the next one because they are a great program in the

region. you know, there are a lot of programs there or several programs in the other jurisdictions that we would love to see come to san francisco. we're excited to hear that there are programs being looked at, although i'm unclear what the seven new programs that sfpuc are looking to expand are. i look forward into maximizing the use. i saw presentations in other agencies on the many categories of energy users that are actually eligible. it's much bigger than i thought and we really should be doing what mce is doing in helping customers take full advantage of the pool of money they took from us in the first place. lastly, i do want to back up eric on the virtual power plant in a slightly different angle. i work with a lot of different agencies at the regional level. i'm trying to get rules passed

and ordinances adocumented and things like that. i think the timeframe on this grant and this pilot project implementation shows the need to supervise our ambitions. separately from we have to do this argument that eric is making, i want to point out that this pilot project, the timeframe is ending in 2024. we talked about 2030, which those who are not climate exp t experts, but since 1990. they talked about 2030 was far away and we would have jet packs by then. now we're almost reaching 2030 with some of our regulations that we're putting online at certain agencies and the project won't come on board until 2024. in order for us to meet our 2030 goals, we have to stop the small

ball. we have been talking about small balls since the '90s. i think we're seeing a bit of a disconnect. in a relative fashion, it's comple complete completely different with the scale of the problem, so i think that we really need to take -- >> your three minutes is up. madam chair, i believe that completes the queue. >> thank you very much. seeing no one else in the queue, i like to -- oh, there is no action needed. at this time, i see that commissioner mar must leave us. i like to make a motion to excuse commissioner mar. could i have a second please? >> second.

>> thank you very much commissioner haney. can i have a roll call vote on excusing commissioner mar. >> vice chair cruz pollock. >> aye. >> commissioner haney. >> aye. >> chairperson fewer. >> aye. >> there are three ayes. >> thank you very much. madam clerk, can you please call item number five. >> item number five, a presentation and update on the findings of a lafco commissioned survey of food delivery workers in san francisco. the meeting id is 146-354-7117 and then press pound and pound again. please dial star three to line up to speak and the system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please remain on hold until the system indicates you have been

unmuted when the public comment is called. >> thank you very much. madam clerk, today we have our executive officer bryan goebel and chris benner. >> thank you madam chair and commissioners. we released the findings of at base delivery workers in san francisco and professor benner is here with the presentation. combined with the bigger representative survey that was released in may and the online covid survey, this new survey being released today provides a better snapshot of this vulnerable workforce. we are seeking additional funds to expand the survey, but looking ahead, the future research and surveys that lafco commissions will depend on proposition 22. that measure backed by the companies would keep at base workers as independent contractors and restrict local

regulations, including some of the recommendations that we presented to you back in may. the first of its kind representative survey that benner and his team released in may is proving to be a useful data point to help voters make a proposition about 22. it's linked in the guide and was cited in an editorial this week and has been cited in a number of media publications. i just want to commend the survey team for all their work on this new survey and thank our funders, the san francisco foundation, the ford foundation, the chavez family foundation. with that, i would like to pass it over to professor benner for his presentation. >> thank you so much. can you see the presentation okay? >> we are not seeing a presentation yet.

>> do we have a copy of the presentation we can assist with? >> we do not have a copy of this one. >> there it goes. >> can you see it now? >> i can see it on my screen. >> oh, i'm sorry. i cannot see it on mine.

>> could mr. benner possibly e-mail it to us? >> i think i see it now. >> it says cover title on demand an on the edge. >> yes, in blue, right? >> wonderful. my apologies for the technical glitch there. >> no problem. >> well, thank you once again for the opportunity to present this updated data as mr. goebel indicated this is an ongoing collaboration with jobs with justice san francisco, the job with justice education fund, working closely with mr. goebel's office to understand the employment practices of on demand mobility workers in san francisco using this representative selection process. as you know, we had to stop the survey when covid eresuupted ine spring before we were able to get a sufficient sample size to compare practices of individual

companies. so we were presenting broad patterns between ride hailing drivers and delivery drivers. since the pandemic, the number of delivery drivers have spiked. there had been an increase in employment. so what we wanted to do was to really focus on those delivery drivers. one of the questions that we also had was about whether it was possible to do an effective survey in the midst of a pandemic and to do it safely. so just as a reminder, what our methodology does is not a representative sample of all people that have done this work on some level. our focus is what's the workforce required for these companies to provide this service in san francisco? so it's a representative sample of the work being done, not of all work. this is an important point because the companies themselves like to stress that when you look at everyone that does some of this work, there are many who

do it intermittently, very part time. the services they provide actually depend on people who are doing this work as their primary means of income and mostly full time. i'll show you some of those statistics again from this particular workforce. so the study was conducted during the summer. we really wanted to ask a couple of methodological questions of could it be done safely and what kind of response rate would we get. then to get more indications of during the pandemic, what is similar and what might have shifted from our previous survey findings that were back in february. one of the things that we were tremendously pleased by is that our response rates, which for these delivery drivers were about 15% back in the previous survey, were closer to 80%. you can see the figure there is. 81% for door dash, 79% for

amazon fresh. you know, part of that points to the increasing skills of our survey takers who were employed with jobs for justice in how to text ahead of time to the delivery drivers to expect that a survey would be coming so they would be prepared and tell them more about the purpose of it. of course when people are delivering, they have a very short period of time. so to be able to let them know ahead of time that we would be asking them to complete the survey helped. so we also shortened the survey dramatically so it a shorter period of time. all the surveys were done with masks, appropriate social distancing and health precautions. so we feel good that it was done safely. i'll just mention as i go ahead and present some of these results, you will see some charts in which we look at the responses from individual apps. we looked particularly at these

three, door dash, instacart and amazon fresh. because these sample sizes are small, the differences between apps are not significantly significant. so we wanted to present how a fuller survey may reveal in our efforts to get additional funding for those specific company practices. so under the survey findings, again, tremendously diverse workforce with predominately people of color. about 75% people of color, and in our findings in the summer, 36% are immigrants, foreign born, and slightly less than the pre-covid era. i think that raises an important question of what are the challenges to immigrants retaining employment during the pandemic. still a predominately male workforce. we do see some signs that there are more women in grocery

delivery working for instacart. i'll show you that chart in just a second. a higher percentage of these delivery workers who are providing services in the summer live in san francisco. we're seeing people coming from further away to provide the delivery services in san francisco because of the higher concentration of work here but during covid, that was less the case and most of the people doing the case live in san francisco as well. here are some of the charts available. now to highlight a few, this looks at gender. the average across all the surveys and that's the one the most meaningful. with instacart, it was slightly over 50% who identified as

female. so i think we do see some significant gender differences between the prepared food delivery and other amazon fresh grocery delivery. when we talk about an immigrant population, those are people all over the world. it's not concentrated in one particular location. that's important because immigrants are more vulnerable in our labor market. we didn't ask if they were documented or not. it's a vulnerable workforce. there is lots of evidence in the survey about the difficult economic circumstances that people face. one of the things that struck out in this survey is a significantly higher percentage of people working support others with their earnings.

67% compared to half that in the pre-covid survey, including 69% that support children. you know, our sense is that this is because people have few options and if they have family members to support, and children to support, they will do the work, even if they are concerned about the health impacts and low working conditions, poor working conditions. 15% have no health insurance and 31% use public health access health insurance. 25%, this is higher than in the previous pre-covid survey, 25% receive some form of public support. the highest percentage of that are those who receive food stamps, the light blue bar, and you can also see housing assistance, women, children, et cetera. and again, this is not a gig for

most people. the majority of our survey respondents work full time for platform companies, over half work more than 30 hours a week, 30% work more than 40 hours a week and 13% in the survey work more than 50 hours a week. this is slightly less than the figures that we had in the precovid, but not very substantially. it's really clear that people are doing this as their primary source of income and in many cases their only source. 57% said it was their entire income last month and another 13% said it was 75% or more of their income. so these are their only jobs in most cases. the earnings are quite low. before expenses, and this is one of the critical things mr. goebel mentioned, prop 22. you know, these companies under current california law will be required to reimburse all

expenses of their drivers. they're trying to prop 22 to get around that state law. it's the state requirement under av5. so we look at median earnings, $450. so depending on how you calculate the expenses, we asked them both to give us actual expenses in the last month, so we could get a sense of immediate expenses, but of course wear and tear on an automobile, on a car, accumulates over a long period of time so you need to account for that. so the alternative method was calculating based on mileage driven and that drops to $270 a week for median earnings, despite working full time or close to full time. actually, we estimate when you account for that full expenses, as much as 12% might be earning nothing when all those expenses are accounted for. again, you ask how is that

possible? if you are postponing the expenses to maintain your car to bring in current income, that really should not be accounted as earnings, even though people need it at the moment. those expenses should be reimbursed by these companies in my view. delivery workers are dependent on tips, than the ride hailing workers. workers also had a significant amount of unpaid time as they're waiting for orders or driving to a pick up location. there is also unpredictable earnings, in part because some portion of their pay is due to incentives and bonuses provided by the companies themselves, which again is another indicator that they largely control the conditions of employment and work. so this is a chart that shows some of those figures, the median income for all of them at

450. this is accounting for named expenses, bringing it down to 380 and this is the figure bringing it down to $270 when you did that expenses based on estimated mileage, which leaves about 12%, who might be earning nothing when all expenses are accounted for. we can see that for the median respondents, 30% is the estimate of how much of their income comes from tips, which of course is not counted for minimum wage purposes under state and city law. again, unpaid time is 30%. there are other indicators from this survey of the ways that the apps manage the job opportunities of what is offered to people on the app. people felt penalized for declining certain job offers if they decided not to accept a

certain job offer. so they interpreted some type of punishment, 25% thought they were offered less bonuses and 17% said they were threatened with deactivation and 22% thought the app handled it fairly. we continued to be interested in bike delivery as an option and to see what happens in that case. we actually had 26% of all delivery workers in the survey say that the bicycle was their primary mode of delivery. 11% use an electric bike. that was higher than our survey results in the pre-covid period by a substantial amount. you can see here again, i present these differences between the apps as elustive of what we may learn if we are able to get funding to do a full

survey that it appears that door dash workers are using bikes for the delivery of food, substantially more than groceries. perhaps that's not surprising because groceries can be heavier and larger. we're up to almost 50% of people doing door dash delivery during covid, in the city, who are using bicycles. you can speculate a bit about why that might be higher now during covid with perhaps less congestion on the streets, perhaps safer, people feeling more hopeful for doing that. i think it was an interesting finding as well, even though overall, it was less than 30 who were working on bikes. we did finally ask a question on whether people would like to have some kind of organization. we didn't specify what that was, whether a union or workers organization or representative body in the city. we just asked this question, if they had an interest in some

organization that would represent them and other workers in negotiating with app companies over issues like pay rates, bonuses, handling of customer complaints, et cetera. 38% answered yes. just at the moments, there are no unions in this industry and it's hard to get collective representation because the companies are classifying themselves as itndependent contractors. 38% answered yes, they would like representation and 37% in addition to that answered maybe. and i think the policy implications from this are reinforcing everyone during the covid times what we concluded from the previous survey as well. on demand delivery work in san francisco is performed by people who are close to full time work and their primary source of income. it's a diverse workforce with high levels of immigrants. this workforce struggles to make

ends meet. there is evidence that these companies are not for a substantial portion of their workforce meeting the equivalent of san francisco's minimum wage. so many also don't receive benefits they would be entitled to under state law if they were classified as employees in san francisco regulations as well. so i think it underscores the importance of policymakers, ensuring laws are enforced. as mr. goebel mentioned, if prop 22 passes in this election, it will severely constrain our abilities to help protect this very vulnerable and low paid workforce. with that, i would be happy to take any questions, comments, or feedback. >> thank you very much. any comments or questions for the professor? i do have a question and i am wondering that if -- have we

done any analysis if prop 22 were to pass or recommendations? it would limit our ability at a local level to enact some of the recommendations that we're thinking about. so i think that it would be -- i mean is it your opinion that we should be incorporating the recommendations after november, if it should pass, about what we can actually do? i mean i also am wondering if there is any statewide effort besides this prop 22 in preparation if prop 22 passes that any organizing happening in light of prop 22 passing. so those are just sort of questions that i'm worried prop 22 is going to pass because they put so much money at it. >> right. i'll ask mr. goebel to answer some of that as well. i'm not a lawyer and i think you have to get legal advice on specifically what might be possible under prop 22 or not.

i do know that there are people very concerned about it being passed or thinking of legal challenges to it. i don't know the status of that or what basis they would be challenging that. if it passes and it's not successfully challenged, it gets implemented in december. it's a very quick implementation process. >> okay. thank you very much. i see commissioner haney. >> thank you for this and this is obviously both very informative and very concerning and actually angering that this is the reality for so many people. i didn't see anything there that really focused on flexibility. that's something that we hear a lot about and you know, maybe something for future analysis, a question of whether you know how important flexibility is and whether there are certain needs

around that or concerns or fears around limits to flexibility, in terms of when and how and where they're working. >> yeah, thank you for that question commissioner haney. in this survey, we didn't ask specific questions ability flexibility because that is one of the set of questions we had in the previous survey. we were trying to keep this short and thought we had enough evidence from that, that showed people value flexibility. we had people rate a variety of work characteristics on a one to five rating. it was clear that people valued flexibility and they also value fair pay at the same level. they also value access to typical benefits of being an employee, health benefits, unemployment insurance, access to workers' comp, nearly as high as flexibility. so the point that i make on all of this is that it's not a trade

off. it is very possible to be able to have flexible hours and you know some kind of choice in scheduling and to provide all the benefits and protections we expect of employers in california in this situation. so, it might be worth doing some more investigations of types of flexibility that this workforce particularly values. i think we have clear evidence already that yes, flexibility is important and just as important are all the things that go along with being a legal employee of these companies. i think the companies are being disingenuous by saying it's a trade off. they have very smart people in these companies providing a needed service. they can if i wering -- figure out ways of providing flexibility in scheduling and providing a good service and treating their employees correctly. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. commissioner pollock.

>> thank you. this survey is, you know, as commissioner haney mentioned is deeply concerning, the results of it. my question has to do with prop 22. i wonder if there was a way to reconnect with respond -- respond dents to ask about their thoughts on prop 22 specifically that customers of those apps have been contacted by the app p companies to ask them to vote for prop 22 and delivery workers have been asked to include stickers and flyers and that kind of thing to vote for prop 22. i just wondered if there was a

way to reconnect with respondents and ask them their thoughts on prop 22, specifically. >> i really appreciate the question and it's an important point. i think given our resources and capacity before the election, and of course some people have already been voting. we would not get a representative sample of people's thoughts on prop 22. we could do more interviewing of a smaller subset. i have a graduate student that may be interested in doing that in the next couple of weeks that may give us some indication of people's response to that. as i'm sure you're aware, there are lots of communication between different app workers on social media around these issues and we wouldn't have a representative sample of all the respondents, but i think it would be interesting to see what they say.

>> that's something i would be interested in hearing and i don't know if it could be reported out to lafco in a memo since the next lafco meeting will be after election day. >> i'll have a conversation with mr. goebel about it and we can see about doing that. i do have a graduate student who may be available to do that interview before november 3rd and we can report it back to you if we're able to do that. >> okay. thank you. any other commissioner -- those are the only two commissioners available. okay. thank you. it is depressing the findings. it is institutional and structurally inequitable and wrong. that is sometimes the hardest things to change, they're designed to do so.

when you try to fight back, they have the big dollars, as we can see on television commercials, quite frankly. i think it is a good point that you know, that you can still have flexibility and you can still have fairness in pay and working conditions, right? so it's not one or the other. i mean you have good points. let's open this up for public comment please madam clerk. >> yes, madam chair, operations is checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. operations, please let us know if there are any callers that are ready. if you are on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. is there anyone on the line? >> yes, i have one caller in the queue. >> hello again commissioners, eric brooks with the previous clean energy groups i mentioned and also with our city san

francisco, local grassroots organization. first of all, thanks for the presentation. this crucial vital information shows the absolutely -- i mean the importance of the lafco cannot be overstated after seeing a presentation like this. we need to keep this commission in gear. a couple of things, you know, since i'm representing clean energy groups, i would say let's make sure as we move these studies forward, we're including ways to subsidize and encourage and make sure all these drivers are using zero emission vehicles soon. i also think it would be interesting. we have a set of drivers that have been working for decades that we could be polling, that it would be interesting to see their work and pay and job security and how their job works out compared to these gig drivers and that would be the

pizza delivery drivers. i'm sure they have a different situation, but maybe there are some things that are better, maybe some things that are worse. we should put them in future surveys. the last thing is the most important thing i want to mention, which is that i want to make sure we keep on the table the most important aspect of all of this, which is that if the city and county of san francisco develops its own open source p apps for these ride hails and for these delivery drivers, then we could immediately after getting those apps successfully on the table, just to simply put all these companies out of business and that should be our objective so that these -- so that would make it easier for us to serve the needs of these workers in our community. so let's make sure that we're keeping that as our final goal as well, to make sure that we're simply making these companiies o

longer possible in our city and no longer necessary. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. is there anyone in the queue? >> that completes the queue. >> thank you. >> okay. >> public comment on item number five is now closed. i think another aspect about this is delivery food workers, which we heard from the small business groups that these delivery companies are also gouging our small businesses and that's probably a whole other topic too. we do not need an action on this but we require a word of thanks to the professor for bringing us that study and sharing the results today. can you please call item number six. >> item number six, the executive officer's report. a, new lafco research associate adiba kahn. >> thank you madam chair. i wanted to welcome adiba to our

office. she's the public affairs at northern california. she graduated from berkeley where she obtained a bachelor's of arts degree. she's a bangladesh american from oklahoma. she founded, original dmieganiz led a reproductive justice campaign called campus action for reproductive equity. it aims to expands access to student health centers by 2023 and her bill became law in 2019. upon graduating, adiba was a paralegal in san francisco, representing incarcerated people. later she was an organizer for the bernie 2020 campaign in nevada, arizona, and pennsylvania. she hopes to pursue a masters in

public policy. at lafco, adiba's work is going to center around researching power disconnections in san francisco, following up on a report we issued last year. i'm excited that adiba is joining us as a research associate. please join me in welcoming her to lafco. that concludes my report madam chair. >> thank you very much. i think on behalf of all the commissioners and this commission, we welcome her and thank you very much mr. goebel for recruiting her and adding her to our team. thank you. there is no action needed, let's open it for public comment. >> operations, please let us know if there are any callers ready. if you haven't already done so, members of the public should press star three to be added to the line. for those on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted.

>> madam chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> public comment on item number six is now closed. we do not require an action. madam clerk, can you please call item number seven. >> item number seven is public comment. >> are there any members of the public that like to speak? >> operations, please let us know if there are any callers lined up to speak for general public comment. members of the public please press star three to be added to the queue now. if you are on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. >> madam chair, there are no caller in the queue. >> thank you very much. public comment is now closed. could we please call number eight. there is no action needed on item number seven. madam clerk, please call item number eight. >> item number eight is future agenda items. >> yes, colleagues, any future agenda items?

i think that we have one last meeting before the end of the year. seeing no one in the queue, can we open this up for public comment please? >> operations is checking to see if there are any callers in line. if you haven't already done so, press star three to be added to the queue. wait on hold and continue to wait until you have been unmuted. is there anyone in the queue? >> yes, i have one caller in the queue. >> hi, one last time commissioners, eric brooks, san francisco clean energy advocate. so, i just want to reiterate what jed and i talked about earlier, the importance of next year getting a virtual power plant, a real virtual power plant plan for citywide clean energy buildout on the table and voted on next year so that we're

doing what's necessary to be commensurate with the climate crisis and what i would ask you and executive officer goebel to do is to make sure and start ageneral diazoing updates with developing a citywide development plan so we're hearing reports back about that. i feel like if we don't start agen agendaing that item on lafco, we're not going to get there. i make that request that you start making a report back about local build out plans and every month agenda item. thank you. >> thank you for your comment. is there anyone else in line? >> madam chair, that completes the queue. >> thank you very much. public comment on item number eight is closed. before we adjourn the meeting, i

wanted to mention that i think -- i would recommend for folks to watch on netflix a life on our planet. if that doesn't scare you, i don't know what will. it makes our work here at lafco and our clean energy even more important and i want to thank everyone for all the presentations today that were so informative. thank you and thank you colleagues. madam clerk, is there any more business for today? >> that concludes our business for today. >> we are adjourned. thank you. >> thank you. [♪] democracy, and our

leaders would not be where we are today without the career leader of ruth bader ginsburg. the league of women voters is a san francisco nonpartisan political nonprofit. the league never endorses candidates, however, we do take stands on issues. we are committed to providing the resources that voters need to exercise this most fund amountal right of our democracy and be assured that our votes will be counted. please remember that you must be registered to vote by october 19. all registered voters will receive a mail ballot in early october, and options for in-person voting will be

available, as well, both early and also on election day, november 3. please visit our website at lwvsf.org/vote where you will find all of the resources that we offer. the league of women voters is a nonprofit organization. if you would like to get involved, please contact us or go to our website. i would like to introduce our moderator tonight, [inaudible] she was appointed by governor newsom as the chief of staff to the california public utilities commission in 2019. well come, luong.

>> thank you, and welcome, candidat candidates, to the forum for district 11 board of supervisors candidates forum. first, i'd like to remind you of our ground rules. responses should be on the issues and policy-related. candidates are expected to be respectful of other candidates and asked to not make personal attacks on other individuals. here are the procedures for this evening's forum. the candidates will have the opportunity to make 90-second opening and closing statements. opening statements will be in alphabetical order by first name. closing statements will be in

reverse alphabetical order by first name. each candidate will have 90 seconds to answer questions. each candidate will have the opportunity to answer the same number of questions. any rebuttals may be included in the candidate's closing statement, which will be 90 seconds. a count downtimer will be displayed with a visual indication. the aspect of the forum will be equally fair to all candidates. thank you to our attendees tonight. you are in listen-only mode. the q&a and chat features are not active. this forum will be ordered and made -- recorded and made available on our website,

lwvsf.org, our youtube channel, and sfgovtv channel. tonight's forum will give you an opportunity to learn before you vote on november 3. now, let's begin. you will start off with 90-second statements in alphabetical order. [inaudible], and thank you for participating in this forum. please introduce yourself, tell us which neighborhood you live in, and why you are running for district 11 supervisor. we'll start with ahsha safai. you're on mute. >> okay. sorry. my name is supervisor ahsha safai. thank you to the san francisco league of women voters for having me tonight.

i've proudly represented this district for the last four years. when i first ran for office, i had just been working with organized labor for almost a decade and cared deeply about being a strong voice for working families. distri district 11 has one of the highest concentration of children and people under 19. we are the backbone of this city, the people that get up and make san francisco work fore every single day, and for the last four years, i've been a strong voice for those families every day. whether it was our green jobs legislation, whether it was ensuring we chad accessible affordable child care or a woman chief of staff when i was elected board of supervisors. this week honoring justice ginsburg, i'm very proud to say that the san francisco political women's committee,

along with planned parenthood of northern california has given me their sole endorsements. i've been a fighter and working hard for my district. i'm very proud, and i look forward to another four years. >> thank you. john avalos. >> good evening. it's really great to be here. i'm john avalos, and i'm a 22-year resident of district 11. i live in the excelsior neighborhood of district 11. i'm a father of two, fiance to raquel redondiez, and living with her. have a senior at balboa high, and a balboa graduate living with us in this neighborhood. i'm very honored to have this opportunity to experience

representing people in district 11, minorities, people of color, working class, people who are teachers restaurant workers, a lot of people who are dealing with unemployment at this time. we are in a real difficult situation with the pandemic and the economic crisis that we're in, and looking to bring back all of my work i did at the board of supervisors, working citywide to make sure we could have the resources for the entire city, but also working with residents here in district 11 so make sure we can build our parks and commercial corridors, making sure we have child care for our families, that we have families, support for our schoolworkers. thank you. >> marcella -- marcello colusi.

>> thank you. my name is marcello colusi, and i am running for district 11 supervisor. i am running because i was a worker in people's homes at one time, and they were shocked about what's going on in our city. i think we need to not do politics in between and do what is the most efficient for our residents. that's actually why i'm running for supervisor district 11 san francisco. >> thank you. now we'll move onto our questions for tonight. we'll start with ahsha. how do you define affordable

housing, and what specific steps will you take to increase affordable housing in district 11? >> thank you. when i first got on the board of supervisors, we were able to engage on the inclusionary housing program on the city. it's where we asked project sponsors to set aside a certain amount of housing as affordable. but the question was affordable for who? affordable for so long has been defined as extremely low-income. and what that meant was teachers, janitor's, nonprofit workers could afford to live in district 11, working class neighborhood, could no longer afford to live in san francisco. so i'm very proud to say we were able to expand the definition slightly, and prior to me coming into office,

probably about 17 upts nits of affordable housing. we have built 600 units, with 2,000 in the pipeline. we have worked with the mayor to purchase the city's largest acquisition in history, making 25 units affordable in perpetuity. >> thank you. marcello, same question. you're on mute. >> thank you. affordable housing for me is the people that work in our

neighborhoods for minimum wage can afford here. i don't think that's going to end until the city of san francisco does what [inaudible] when you think about it, they have 40,000 employees, they have $12 billion budget. the only reason that the housing is so expensive, the only reason the housing is so expensive is the builders are trying to make a profit. the moment you cut profits in between, it will be stop. the city needs to -- it will not stop. the city needs to open their own nonprofit. they have the opportunity, and they have everything to do it. >> john? >> thank you. affordable housing, to me, is where our housing costs no more than what a household of 120%

area median income can afford, where they're paying no more than 30% of their income for housing. i also believe that we need to be building housing no more than that, that rate, but also a large -- the largest amount of housing that is deeply affordable. here in district 11, we have a lot of households that are bundled up into single homes and need relief. a lot of them are very low-income and would benefit from having deeply affordable housing. for me, i've been working for years to expand finances for housing, affordable housing in san francisco, looking at various sources from our general fund to housing bond. i actually wrote the housing bond on 2015, and i wrote with the mayor of san francisco the housing trust fund in 2012. i'm excited about propositions i and propositions k that are

on the ballot that are going to tax real estate transfers to bring in money for creation of municipal housing. pr prop k would allow the city to create public housing, and i want to create a public bank that would shape how we create public housing to benefit all of san francisco. >> thank you. for the next question, we'll start with marcello. how about you ensure that the current residents of district 11 will be able to remain in their homes given the increased cost of living in san francisco and the economic downturn due to the covid-19 pandemic? >> it's going to have to involve everyone: the landlords, the tenants, the city. you have landlords that are

making money on the properties, you have landlords that are barely making it or going on the rent, and because of that, you have to go case by case to figure out who can do it and who is in deep trouble so that the moment that those landlords are going to lose their homes to [inaudible] and the same issue. the banking industry, as soon as they get a foreclosure they're going to start kicking people out. we're going to have a huge crisis, and we cannot have that. we have to work [inaudible] political issues trying to work for our residents and actually give our people, keep our residents at home.

>> thank you. john? >> it's really tough to see what's happening right now for a lot of people living in the city and, of course, in district 11 households who are unemployed or getting less unemployment money are now making difficult choices, whether to pay rent or mortgage or the food on the table. these are real-life issues and have a lot to do with what we've been experiencing for years but are now heightened during the pandemic and this economic crisis. as supervisor, i created and worked on various methods to allow people to stay in their homes. advancing tenant protections, we need to expand in that. as supervisor, i made it illegal to destroy rental housing, and that has protected thousands of units here in san francisco and district 11. i've also made it easier to set

up a.d.u.s and accessory dwelling units are able to stay up and running. we have funding available through the city and d.b.i. for people who want to modify those. i've worked to create principle reduction programs in san francisco so that we can actually ensure that a wide variety of people, homeowners and renters can stay in san francisco and not be threatened by the crisis that we're in and actually have faith that we can keep our residents here in the city. thank you. ahsha? >> thank you. i think there's a -- this is a very good question. it's about the immediate. it's about what we are going to do right now, today, because people are being he ievicted. they're getting sick and losing their jobs? one of the things we were able

to do as supervisors were creating an eviction moratorium, so no one will be evicted during this health crisis. myself and dean preston and others put that forward. but we also need to have rental assistance. if people have rental assistance, they will be able to pay their rent and the help they need to pay their mortgages. district 11, 94112, has the highest number of requests for rental assistance, and we've helped to facilitate that working with the q foundation. on a daily basis, people are calling us for assistance paying their rent. the other thing we need to do is open up our economy back in a safe manner. we've moved to orange. myself and supervisor peskin worked on legislation that's called our healthy and hotel

ordinance. that will allow people to go back to work. when people go back to work, they have to go that they will be safe in their job, so we created 80 hours of sick leave to help them. >> thank you. so the next question will start with john. what are your plans to bring equity and jobs, education, and economic development to the black communities in district 11, especially in the lakeview and sunnydale neighborhoods? >> thank you. i'm proud to have worked on the local hiring ordinance. back in 2010, i was the sponsor of it and worked closely with the african american community, with mike brown, who is the director of inner city youth at that time, to make sure that we were creating jobs with our public funds when we actuality

built -- actually built municipal buildings. that's resulted in people being able to find jobs in the building trades here in san francisco. and as supervisor are, i've actually worked over the years to develop the lakeview community collaborative, the lakeview community collaborative that is a number of organizations working together for a budget that serves them, that keeps programs running and going. it's been great to see that the work is ongoing, and based on that organization that we initiated back in 2010, that it's a workforce center now on broad street. and as supervisor, i want to do much more to actually look at the private sector and how we can do local hiring in the private sector, and anyone that wants to be doing -- setting up shop here at the office of economic and workforce development, to be able to

provide small business support to hire local residents. >> thank you. ahsha? >> thank you. it's a great question. if the folks in district 11 have felt ignored and not given the help they need, the blake families in lakeview felt even more like that. we looked at where the incarceration rate, drop out rate, homeless rate was, and based on those statistics from day one, we asked for and advocated for resources to go into black lakeview. we opened up the first jobs center in the district in that regard, right there on broad and capital. the mayor and i cut the ribbon on that last year. we are building a brand-new library in that area of town. we have invested in black-led

organizations. i.t. book man, inner city youth, and i.t. first, all of which are invested in, promoting, and assisting the black community and youth. i think that's what equity looks like. we didn't wait until the recent movement of black lives matter, we've been doing that from day one. another thing is empowering and uplifting folks from the black community to lead and advocate for themselves. that's what happened in a movement we called invest black. many folks in the community led that. they put their stamp on broad street, and we're very, very proud of that work. >> thank you. marcelo? >> i personally think that [inaudible] and what we have to do is train people to actually [inaudible] and to train them to work with their own

businesses, even if it [inaudible] when somebody can have a small business in their house, they will not have to commute. they will be producing money on a daily basis, and part of my idea is yujust to have small businesses over the place who can support each other. when you have small businesses working for corporations, and those corporations close down shop, and they leave, and those peoples are out of work. when you have a small business that's owned by the residents of the neighborhood, those small businesses survive, and they -- they thrive, and that's when the economy comes back. the idea is to push it, as much as we can, to train and to actually work with the residents to be able to open

their own businesses. >> thank you. for the next question, we'll start with marcelo. what do you consider to be the most important infrastructure improvements and projects needed for district 11? how did ywill you advocate fore projects? >> i think safe streets, to be able to walk to the store. [inaudible] i think that part is huge for our community basically because, like, the other candidates say, we have the most children -- most children will be able to say in their houses. they will be able to go to public schools, and the public

schools [inaudible] we'll actually give that allocation to our kids, and those kids will be able to [inaudible] coming from all over the place in two or three years. we owe it to those families. we have to be able to work on those projects to be able to uplift our communities. >> thank you. john? >> thank you. actually, i loved the question about community development. i think it's one of my greatest focuses when i was supervisor was working with the community from the grassroots up to define what we need for our districts so we can thrive and live and remain in the districts.

so now, we're in real tough times, and we need to figure out how we can make real tough action, and the best thing we can do is have a whole new economy centered around our whole future. and for me, that's a green new deal, and that includes all of the infrastructure that we're going to need for sustainable. number one is the housing investment. i mentioned some of the resources that we have on the ballot this year, prop i, and prop k. we also have other resources that have recently been approved with the prop c that has now been -- the funds have been released so we can use housing needs for a lot of people that are homeless in our district. we also need to put money into transit and build jobs around the creation of transit based on renewable energy. our parks are really a vital resource, and especially during the pandemic, we need to find a place to access nature and

release ourselves. i want to be part of creating an urban ag system that will be mutual aid in our investment efforts. we need slow streets, and that's why i'm petitioning to change d.b.i. with prop w. >> thank you. ahsha? >> one of the biggest things that we're working on right now is prop a, our mental health and recovery bond also for your parks. i advocated to ensure that crocker-amazon were included in that. the san francisco giants are going to supplement that. that would be more than a $30 million investment by the

giants. another one is excelsior playground, definitely needs to be revitalized and redone, and then, another park. and then, continuing the housing. we're in the process of building more housing than has ever been built in district 11. we have to see those projects through, and we have to find more funding to build more workplace housing and more affordable housing. the final one that i'm very proud of is the library. we're going to create the largest neighborhood library in the city. it's on the corner of orizaba and brotherhood. we're going to go from the smallest neighborhood library to the largest neighbor library. and then finally, we have a $20 million improvement to our neighborhood corridors. we have some of the highest fatality corridors, and that

will begin in the spring. >> thank you. for this question, i'll start with ahsha. what funding for the police would you support going to other specific services. what specific changes would you require to be in place before the change is implemented? >> it's a great question. some of the largest number of calls we get are people that are unhoused, people with mental health issues, and the police are often the first one to respond. in this ballot, as i said, prop a will have dollars for mental health. very pleased to see we were going to have additional dollars for mental health sf. was pleased to work with my colleagues supervisor hillary ronen and matt haney, along with the mayor. with the prop c being unlocked, winning that in the courts,

that will mean additional dollars for mental health services. the police, one of the highest volume calls they get, have to do with our mental health individuals, and it will allow the freeing up of police to go on other calls. and then, when we were able to have the resources, which we do now, and will come more, we need to have mental health professionals responding to those that are unhoused and have mental health crisis, and we have the ability to do that and transition nicely. >> thank you. john? >> thank you.

we have, across the country, calls for defending the police. i've been looking at that issue, and what we need to implement. for me, what we need to be doing is transforming completely how we do public safety work in san francisco and across the country. our policing has been based on racist institutions going back, you know, 150, 200 years, and we need to remake actually entirely how we do it. we need to narrow the intervention scope to what the police department does, but also putting a lot of resources into presvention, making sure that people have access to mental health care and addiction care and life sources that are out there. we need to make sure that we're putting in the resources like case managers and mental health

clinicians and have those in place before we start making cuts to the police department. i was really alarmed that we didn't do that now when the budget was wide open before us. we have a lot of people in district 11 who could benefit from mental health services, addiction services, a navigation center, and there's no place to do that. >> thank you. marcelo? >> thank you. what is -- this is the main question. we definitely need more resources, personally, i think, on mental health which has

become an epidemic in san francisco on drug issues, which is also an issue. i was an e.m.t., and i consider it bad at that time. the question is now do we have enough police on the streets to take care of the issues of the people who are out on the streets going to work? we have to look at this on a much different way than just cutting the funding of the police department. i do believe we need a lot more help on mental health and addiction. this is the main issue because the city is having a tough time, and this is not [inaudible] people are dying. i mean, people tell us every day, and [inaudible] and people are dying.

it's unbelievable. san francisco has [inaudible] and at this time, you know, like i said before -- >> thank you. >> thank you. >> for the next question, we'll start with john. how will you advocate for the current and future educational needs of children living in district 11? >> thank you. i'm really proud to have come out of coleman advocates for children and youth, an organization that's based in district 11 that is on the forefront of looking at education for children, youth, in san francisco. i was a community organizer with coleman advocates, and as supervisor in 2014, i had the first draft of the children's

fund that expanded money for children, youth, and family services, early childhood education services, as well as transitional age youth as well as expand the ed fund for our schools. we also have a ballot measure that's vitally important that we pass for our teachers. it's a tax -- i can't remember the number or the letter of it now, and we need to pass our schools and community first initiative, prop 15, on the california ballot, that will bring greater resources for education programs. it was night and day, the difference between 1978 and 1979, when prop 13 passed. now we can fix that. i look forward to working with community and labor to make sure that we are supporting households who are in our public schools. i also want to set up our hubs in our neighborhood schools so that our hubs can be places where families can access social workers, nutrition, and other services they need to

continue to stay in their homes and continue to have good education experiences. >> thank you. marcelo? >> thank you. so [inaudible] how much i fought the school district of school for [inaudible] for my kids and also equal needs for every student. we have a crisis in [inaudible] and san francisco does not have the resources that they deserve. and before the pandemic, and [inaudible] my idea was to get permission to dump funding into the school district -- the san francisco school district, to pool the resources on our kids because they're going to stay local, they're going to retire

local after they come back from college. just dump as much as we can on our kids in districtthe school district. thank you. >> thank you. ahsha? >> thank you. one of the things that's often left out of the conversation when we're talking about children and educational needs, are children from 0 to 5. it's one of the things that i've learned from president norman yee. he's been a lifelong advocate of children in preschools. actually, my headquarters for my campaign is in the largest nonprofit child care provider in the entire he city. very proud to have worked to ensure that they could buy their building and stabilize that. almost every project that we've worked on in this district,

we've made sure there will be accessible, affordable child care. we don't have direct involvement in the schools. it's usually through the afterschool and summer programs. we were very fortunate the first two years i was in office, we were able to use the educational enrichment fund, eraf, first year, $45 million, and after that, additional dollars into supporting our teachers and paras and educators in the school system. right now, i'm one of the sponsors of and supporters of prop j, which will open up, in year 1, 50 $50 to $60 million our school system. i'm a parent of two public school kids and have the most public school kids on the board of supervisors, so we have to continue to support that. >> thank you. for the next question, we'll start with john. how will you ensure that residents of district 11 have access to services and

resources that will help them meet their basic needs as they struggle with the challenges of the covid-19 pandemic? >> thank you. well, for ensuring that our residents have access to the services that we need, it's really about the budget, the city budget and making sure that the city budget works for working people. one of the biggest issues that i've spent most of my time working on was the city budget when i was in office, and before that, i was an advocate on the city budget, making sure we were providing more resources for seniors and children, youth, and families in particular. in 2009 and 2010, i got to chair the budget committee, overcoming two $500 million

budget deficits each year. so i know a little bit how to move money around and to protect services, and we need to have this type of experience, especially now that chair fewer is leaving the board of supervisors to actually craft our budget, so we are preserving the best of san francisco, our working people, to make sure that we can provide these fs iseservic. i've moved movie into -- money into different programs. thank you. >> thank you. marcelo. >> so this is a case where we have to start auditing where the money is going because in a

12 billion budget, there's a lot of money that's being wasted, and we need to figure out where that money is going and put it in our communities that need it the most. this is the part, also [inaudible] have asked, the main issue, the lack of resources for decades into the poor communities. and we have to start noticing these communities and dumping it into those communities that really need, it desperately need it with the main issue of covid trying to come back from this [inaudible] thank you. >> thank you. ahsha? >> so during this crisis, this was -- this was not about theory anymore, this was about action. and we had to go with basically over the last eight months, my

entire job has been about leading do you remember this crisis and ensuring that district 11 and the entire city had the resources, support, and safety net that we need. we've opened up and help to support three meal distribution sites in district 11. we've distributed over 10,000 masks to individuals and 25,000 gloves and gallons of disinfectants supporting our small businesses. we worked with the board and the mayor to ensure that there was at least $10 million for undocumented families who have been completely left out of the recovery funds that have been created. we've fought for, advocated, and ensured that all workers in the city, all city workers would have access to 80 hours of sick leave, 80 hours of potential inquiry sick leave,

and ensuring sick leave for businesses with 100 employees or more. we're working aggressively to open up the economy safely to make sure that people can go back to work. we also worked with our child care providers to create a $100 million fund so they would have access grants to continue providing early childhood care. >> thank you. we'll start with marcelo. what is your plan to revitalize district 11. >> it comes down to [inaudible]

somebody who's coming down to city hall to open a small business [inaudible] but if you don't help them open, those small businesses [inaudible] we have to help them stay open for as long as they want. >> thank you. ahsha? >> thank you. when i first was elected, we initiated the excelsior outer mission district, and one of the goals was to create a

business corridor. i was presented with a plan by individuals that talked about trying to rezone the entire randolph corridor. i was against that plan. it was not community driven, and it was really about creating investment opportunities that would have essentially led to gentrification and displacement. so we need to ensure that whatever plans we put in order will be community driven and ensure that we're protecting existing businesses but also attracting new businesses that will complement. i'm very proud to say over the last four years that i've been in office, we've gotten dozens of businesses to open up along the corridor. there's still a very high number of vacancies along broad-randolph, as well as mission and geneva. but we're continuing -- every day, one of the first things i did in the planning process was change the law to allow

arrested programming, and -- art programming, and that allowed a few businesses to get in there, and we're going to continue to do that. >> thank you. john? >> one of the biggest questions we're facing is how do we revitalize our business corridor? we have the huge issue of amazon creating a zombie of our commercial corridors and our businesses around the world. one of the things that i want to do is looking at passing prop b. the votership process prop b so we can have a process of making sure our corridors are clean, and we're picking up garbage. i want to look at our empty spaces and use them effectively, doing mutual aid work, but also shared space that a lot of our immigrant businesses can operate in. our city nickels and dimes our

small businesses, and i want to waive that when we are in this economic crisis. i also want to make sure that we create a grant program that supports businesses not just on mission and geneva, but also on broad and randolph streets. we want to make sure that we're building from the grassroots up and making sure that our metrics are being defined by the residents and not by the city. the city has a one-size-fits-all to support our businesses, and what works on divisadero doesn't work for us. >> thank you. and now we'll be going to the final question, and we'll start with ahsha. proposition 15 is the california state ballot measure that would change the method for assessing property taxes on commercial properties with the

goal of creating additional funding for schools and local communities. if this proposition passes, and additional community funding becomes available, how would you propose that san francisco use the increased revenue? >> thank you. well, as a proud supporter of the san francisco labor council, i fully support prop 15 to change the split role tax. this will infuse millions of dollars into our schools and community. i think the first priority has to be the educational system, public education system. we would go to a process of working hand in hand with our school boards and community organizations. i also think there would have to be a conversation from our human rights commission, director sheryl davis, and looking at things through an

equity lens. i think that's one of the things that i've been proud of during my time on the board of supervisors, as well, is ensuring that the office of racial equity is looking at things through that lens. one of the saddest things of covid right now has been expanding and enhancing the learning experiences for brala and brown communities. those schools that are underperforming, those schools that need the additional resources, and our educators would have the financial support that they need. >> thank you. john? >> yes, really important

question. we're hoping that prop 15 passes, so vote for prop 15 all across the state of california. i'm proud to say that i'm endorsed by the united educators of san francisco who are teaching our students, they are our teachers and paras in san francisco. i agree, we need to be putting our greatest investments in our public education system and city college. city college will be a lynch pin for making sure that people are prepared for the recovery and we're building toward a sustainable future. how we're building industries with qualified trained workers who can help rebuild san francisco, our housing, our transit, to make sure that everything is working well.

this is the housing of the future, and prop 15 can provide vital funding for that, as well. we also need to make sure that our department of public health has resources to protect people during the pandemic, and making sure that p.p.e. can be distributed well throughout our neighborhoods so that we can be protected against the spread, as well. those are areas that i would want to make sure that are funded with revenue from prop 15. >> thank you. marcelo? >> first of all, i think it needs to be used to support education during the pandemic, but people who love their jobs, they are about to go off unemployment and if we don't

support those people [inaudible] in particular, they will be homeless. they will create a much wider [inaudible] we need to dump funding into people that need it the most. [inaudible] for the workers that are behind the desks, checking out who needs the help. it's a monumental task. we need to work together, we need to work with common sense, and we need to work hard to be able to approach this main issue. the money [inaudible] the money isn't there, so we need to use it wisely. thank you. >> thank you. now we come to the candidates' closing statements. we will do the closing

statements in reverse alphabetical order, and remember that you have 90 seconds. the order will be marce marcelo colusi, john avalos, and ahsha safai. marcelo? >> thank you. [inaudible] almovote your hear vote who you believe in. [inaudible] but i am trying to change things for the better. [inaudible] if we don't do that, we're going to see the situation worse than what we have created today [inaudible] thank you very much for the

opportunity. >> thank you. >> thank you for -- >> john? >> -- for this evening. it's been really great to share my experience and aspirations for elected office. you know, when i ran for reelection in 2012, i didn't have an opponent, and i really missed the opportunity to reconnect with people in my district, and i'm doing that now, and it's the most incredible experience in my life, most humbling experience i've ever had. i want to be a supervisor who can work with everyone, regardless of people's political point of view. i want to be a supervisor who can actually share the city's resources and the pulpit that we have