>> clerk: hi is that you, mr. lee? >> caller: yes, good morning, my apologies. chairman ronen and members, i am, unfortunately, unable to get to the microsoft team but i can see you on sfgov-tv, and i am happy to testify by telephone if that is acceptable. >> chair ronen: that's perfect. thank you so much. very creative. go right ahead. >> caller: okay. well, first of all, thank you for having the meeting this morning and inviting me to speak. so i am an applicant for assessment appeals board number 3, seat number 3. under ordinance 393-98. and my qualifications to serve on the assessment appeals board include 19 years of professional experience as a practicing attorney in california in 2001.

and 27 years as a trial litigation attorney. i have appeared both in and observed the proceedings. currently i live and work in san francisco, where i have my own law firm. j.k.l. law consulting. previously i was a partner at g.c.a. law partners, a silicon valley-based law firm. and i have served as a temporary judge on the superior court of california while i was practicing down there in santa clara. and i graduated from law school and worked for a federal judge and also spent five years with the department of justice and worked for an international law firm and various firms here in the bay area. so i am very happy to serve and it's considered an honor. and my goal for serving is to ensure to improve the public trust and confidence in our san francisco government. i also believe that it is -- the

assessment appeals board function as an historical and crucial part of california's property assessment and quality assurance program. so if appointed i would seek to serve and to live up to the highest standards of judicial and professional conduct and to make the board of supervisors and our county very proud. thank you very much. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. and thanks for finding a way to get into this meeting. we appreciate it. is there any other callers? >> clerk: madam chair, that completes the queue. >> chair ronen: okay, thank you very much. any comments from my colleagues? nope. then i am happy to make a motion to forward the appointment of jeffrey lee to seat 3 to the board with recommendation. can we please have a roll call vote. >> clerk: yes on that motion

[roll call] ronen aye. the motion passes without objection. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. is there any other items on this agenda? >> clerk: that completes the agenda for today. >> chair ronen: then the meeting is adjourned. have a good day, everyone. thank you. bye.

. >> welcome to the land use and transportation committee for san francisco on monday, october 26, 2020. i am the chair of the committee joined by the clerk. please proceed. >> clerk: thank you, mr. chair. due to the covid-19 health emergency and in order to protect the board of supervisors and the public, the chamber and

committee rooms are closed. the members will be taking care in the meeting remotely. committee members will attend meetings through video conference and participating in the meeting to the same extent as if they are present. public comment will be available on each item of the agenda. the number to call in is being streamed across the screen. opportunities to speak are available via phone by calling the number streaming on your screen, that's 415-655-0001, again that's 415-655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146 347 8588. again, that's 146 347 8588.

then press pound and pound again again. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussion, but you will be in muted and listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, please press star and three to the added to the speaker line. it's best to speak from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or radio. you may submit public comment via e-mail to me at erica.major@sfgov.org. items submitted today will appear on the agenda of november 3, unless otherwise stated.

>> chair: i would like to acknowledge that the other members of the board are present. >> clerk: item one is an ordinance amending the building code to require new construction to utilize only electric power; amending environment code to provide public hearings on implementation of all-electric requirement; adopting findings of local conditions under . members of the public wishing to comment should call the number streaming on the screen, that's 415-655-0001, and the meeting i.d. is 146 347 8588. press found and pound again. if you have not done so already, please press star three to speak. >> chair: thank you, madam clerk. i want to acknowledge the work that supervisor mandelman has done. this is the thirst time this had appeared at the transportation

committee. supervisor mandelman has been at the forefront of a contentious issue working with the house labor and working with the restaurant community and the chinese chamber of commerce. i think we are very close. there may be some non-substantive tweaks that could happen in committee today or at the full board of supervisors next week. with that, i'll turn it over to supervisor mandelman. >> thank you, chair peskin. thank you to all members of the meet for engaging with this legislation over a few of these meetings. as you will recall, a week ago the committee accepted several amendments to the legislation, but continued it to give the broader community additional time to review and understand some of the amendments.

one of these was an amendment to include a waiver process for restaurants that require gas facilities for their unique cuisine or cooking style. again, these waivers would be appealable to the board of examiners as specified in the ordinance and also to the board of appeals as well. i've had a chance to discuss this with the chinese chamber of commerce and the san francisco chamber of commerce as well. i want to be clear both groups would prefer a broader exemption for future restaurant spaces, but i believe this limited restaurant waiver strikes the proper balance allowing for continued use of gas in new buildings in the future, in the cases where appropriate and necessary, while at the same time taking the transition away from natural gas in san francisco. as you know and as chair peskin referenced, we've also been in conversations with local 38 pipe fitters about just transition.

we are in the midst of what i hope will prove to be productive conversations about non-potable water reuse and i look forward to working with city staff, local 38, and other staff members over the coming months to bring forward legislation that will advance our commitment to water reuse. folks, mr. mazola and i hoped the conversations would have progressed a bit further prior to voting this legislation out. we will continue these conversations next week and i will assure mr. mazola if we're not comfortable to where it is at prior to being voted on at the full board, i will myself request a continuance of that legislation for at least one week at the full board. i'm saying that now here publicly to make the commitment

known to all. before concluding, colleagues, i just want to extend my thanks to the committee and all the staff who have worked on a proposal to get us to this point. everyone who participated in the zero emissions building task force and my colleagues on the team and i want to extend a huge thank you to the climate emergency coalition and earth justice and the two dozens environmental organizations who championed this effort from the beginning and remind us every step of the way of the dire emergency of the climate crisis that continues to unfold around us. with that, colleagues, i am

hopeful and would request that you would be able to forward this legislation to the full board with positive recommendations today. >> chair: thank you, supervisor mandelman. can you character the sera club organizati organization. can you speak to that? >> i believe the sierra club are in support of just transition and would want to see this board of supervisors and city and count of san francisco make sure that the transition to a greener economy does not leave workers behind. i don't think they want to see this legislation delayed. >> chair: relative to the just transition, that what you're speaking about relative to local 38 and the building trades?

>> yes, that is what i'm talking. the concern for the trade fitters is the potential additional work involved in electrification is not going to make up for the work that is lost in transitioning away from natural gas. there are good union jobs that can be had through increased water reuse and recycling. san francisco has been a leader, at least in the united states around that. i think it was the hope of the plumbers and pipe fitters that we will break some new ground and move further. i'm happy to try and help make that happen. >> chair: break new ground as long as we don't break any pipes. relative to the work that you've

been doing by -- by way of full disclosure i've been participating in as it relates to the restaurant world. and the solution that you came up with at our last meeting that was a waiver process and the questions around how that waiver process would be applied and what the due process provisions would be applied. can you speak to that, mr. sponsor. >> yeah, so the waiver process is more fully developed in an administrative bulletin that will need to go through the p.b.i. process. all parties concerned will have an opportunity to make their voices married through that process. there will be an administrative

bulletin. ultimately a decision to grant or not the waiver is with the director of the department and his designee. any permit -- any building permit including the decision of whether or not to grant a natural gas exemption for a restaurant can also be appealed to the board of appeals. >> supervisor mandelman, as i spoke to you earlier, the notion of the board of examiners as somebody who's been on the board of supervisors for 13 of the last 20 years was unknown to me. can you tell me what this body is and how they're appointed? >> i will find that out. it is the body that under the

building code is the appeal body. >> chair: yes, i brought this up in my staff meeting this morning and i haves the board of appeals i know, the administrative arm i understand, but this body is unknown to me and how they're appointed and whether or not we would consider that to be a fair and impartial adjudicatory body, i would like to hear about that. >> the short answer is they're appointed by the b.i.c. and there are 13 members. i will find out if they have particular qualifications around their building knowledge. >> chair: how often do they meet and what other appeals come to them? i have to say i've never heard of this entity until you made

those amendments. >> me either. >> chair: i don't know who that was. >> i just wanted to underscore, mr. chair, that i never heard of that either. >> chair: put your name on the moster and then i'll call on you. the floor is yours when you're done eating. >> i'm not eating. thank you. i'll wait to make my comment and then i'll go ahead after public comment. >> chair: supervisor preston, any comments now? >> not now. >> chair: madam clerk, why don't we open this up for public comment. >> clerk: thank you, mr. chair. we're checking if we have any callers in the queue. if you have not done so, please press star three to enter the

queue to speak. you only need to do this once. the system will indicate that you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. >> chair: first speaker, please. >> my name is dave fehee and i am with local 38 plumbers and pipe fitters union. i'm also a member of the mayor's zero emission task force and some of the commercial work groups. i've been involved from the first meeting up until today. let's start by recognizing the supervisors of the land use and transportation committee for their committed support and consideration. i would also like to applaud the ordinance sponsor supervisor mandelman and his staff and all the associated san francisco

agencies that have continued to work their efforts for an equitable transition, including present-day participation just mentioned with the work sessions. it is attributed to the workforce, the citizens, and the future. i would like to recognize the environmental groups that continue to work with us, it is greatly appreciated and all the callers who have supported the water reuse and conservation, through calgreen and other sustainable goals. we've been using the metaphor along the way as the electrification ordinance due to its complexity as a plane which we're trying to land.

i would like to think of it the other way around that it's a plane on the runway and we're trying to land it safely for everyone on board for a smooth takeoff and where the plane or san francisco travels with this ordinance will not just be climate change action, but all further resource protection. we remain optimistic and fully engaged with all involved for a smooth transition to a blue-green implemented program minimizing building impacts on the project -- >> thank you so much for your comments. next speaker, please. you will note that your line is unmuted. >> yes, i live in san francisco in district 11. good afternoon, committee members.

i have spent some of my time during the period of isolation forced on us by covid reading up on climate change. i don't have to tell you that what is coming is genuinely frightening. this is why you're considering this ordinance. it's an early step in reducing san francisco's projection of greenhouse glasses and limited climate change. this is the low-lying fruit, the easy first step. i'm a homeowner and my home uses gas for the air and water heaters and the stove. i'm interested what you do next to establish a path for people like me to get rid of gas. i just just lowered my thermometer and going to attempt to get through with hats and sweaters and space heaters. i realize how trivial the steps are, but i think there are a lot

of san franciscans like me who are very concerned about climate change and want to do all they can to limit it. it's certainly why i'm here today. i appreciate the work this committee and the staff has spent working on this. i ask you to act quickly and send the full ordinance to the board of supervises. >> clerk: thank you, speaker. next speaker, you'll have two minutes. you'll be told your line is unmuted. >> good afternoon. comments on behalf of the california [indiscernible] -- supervisor mandelman for continuing to have productive discussions with us. as we discussed last week

[indiscernible] and appliances in new buildings. the electrification ordinance should be tied to additional requirements to expand the requirements for installing rainwater and recycled water systems in new construction. this would provide workers impacted with new replacement work and also further benefit san francisco and provide a substantial energy and water savings. we're hoping to have language work quickly to improve the ordinance that will put the city in a path to transition the workers. we would ask the committee to delay this by a year so we have time to do this. given the timing that we have, we want to make sure the committee amends the ordinance to recognize the job impact and to include a decline for staff

to come back with a proposed ordinance expanding the rainwater requirements. i'd like to thank [indiscernible] environmental defense fund for continuing to work with us and for supporting us on this issue. i know they're ready and willing to help us go down. [indiscernible] provision that san francisco can take to protect its water, protect its environment, and provide a just transition to the workers that are otherwise going to be losing their cabs due to the electrification ordinance. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker.

>> thank you, supervisor mandelman, again for all your hard work on this through all these months. time is running out for the warming planet, for people, and all other forms of life on earth. for this ordinance to be passed on to the full board, electrifying new buildings is an important first step. please, no further delay. as a grandparent and an organic gardener, i care object a sustainable future. please vote this ordinance out of committee and let the full board vote on it. >> hello, supervisors. this is jennifer haggie, a member of 350 s.f. from district seven. i urge you to support this

legislation with a minimum of exceptions and would like to reiterate three points. there are culinary schools now that teach cool on electric stoves and many cuisines that prepare food on interest stoves. natural gas emissions leak during transit and in our homes and kitchens. it would be far more expensive to retrofit buildings after they've been constructed rather than during construction. i urge you to carry this legislation forward with a minimum of exceptions. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you for your comment. we have 26 listeners and 14 in the queue. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is paul vermer and i

have, as many have spoken at prior sub-committee hearings on this matter. i want to return to the theme of public notice and a public hearing when an exception is granted. they make a big deal to how i can appeal it to the board of examiners, who traditionally have focused on specific, technical issues related to building code only. unfortunately, we have no way of knowing when a permit has been issued. there is no provision to allow notice. so we cannot appeal in a timely manner in this set up that has been put forward. supervisor peskin, you have been well involved with things like the neighborhood commercial district. you may recall a similar

provision in the code for the neighborhood commercial district and called for a review every two years. when i started paying attention to these issues in the commercial districts in san francisco, that was 10 years after the legislation had been passed. it took until 2007, i believe, nearly 20 years before any hearing was held. mandated a hearing in the code and an update in the code does not necessarily make it happen, especially not if, for example, department heads really don't want to push it forward. so i'm concerned that you are casting your hope for public understanding in a very -- in a system that has not demonstrated to be robust. that said, i think it is

essential to get this legislation before the board and passed unanimously -- >> your time has expired. >> clerk: next speaker. >> i am a resident of district five. i want to really support this. as a renter, i live in a house that is more than 50 or 75 years old -- well, the house is 100 years old, but the electrical system is 50 years old. that is a challenge. for example, we want to install an electric dryer. anything that can be installed now will be in use for the next 50 years. i would very much love the

plumbers to be able to install a gray water system for me and my neighbors who are in 50 or 75-year-old buildings that haven't been updated. so i think there's definitely room for everybody to benefit from this. the only thing -- the people who will get hurt the most are people today and people in 50 years will have to deal with bad air quality, worse climate change, the many, many problems that we're seeing. if we continue to have fires like this and people have to be sealed into their homes due to the smoke which is going to be true for at least -- every year is going to be worse for climate change now. that means everybody who gets natural gas will have a worse air quality in their kitchen from now until we do eventually

get rid of the natural gas. a change now means faster change to gray water. that's the cycle of construction in san francisco. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comment. we have 21 listeners and 10 in the queue. next speaker, please. >> my name is stephanie. i'm a constituent in district eight. this is my third time calling in to the board of supervisors, but i've been following this issue through mothers out front and the climate emergency coalition. much like heidi was saying, this hit home when we were sealed in our apartment, couldn't open windows, and i had to cook on

the gas stove, i notice the fumes. every time i walk by our gas stove i notice fumes whether or not it is on. i learned from a pregnancy and toddler health seminar that we need to have windows open when cooking with gas, but now we can't have them open. what are we being subjected to and designing for new homes? i'm really excited and proud to be from rafael's district and i want to be proud of san francisco set be exampling for california and other parts of the united states, having a transition that ensures health and creates jobs like the union. people have said there's great opportunity here.

i ask that you pass this as soon as possible with as few exceptions as possible, close those loopholes and the other gentleman's comment about notifying us when you are considering making an exception is really important as well, so thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. you'll be notified that your line has been unmuted and you may begin your comments. >> hello, i'm debra lee stark, a resident of district nine. as a 73-year-old professional photographer, i'm dismayed that we don't do more to mitigate climate change. we need to be making superhuman efforts. prohibiting the expansion of natural gas in our buildings is important to me because it's a definite step we can take now and it's relatively easy. induction cooking has advantages over gas, it's better, there's

no loss of energy to the air. this is a crucial moment for climate action in california and san francisco can be a leader. please pass the all interest new construction ordinance with no further carve outs so we can start working on the next steps in climate emergency solutions. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker. >> i'm a constituent in district two speaking as the typical san franciscan. i'm so glad to see this moving ahead preventing the expansion of natural in our buildings. compared to the rest of the world, i am pretty privileged. let's not forget that it is the top 5% of the world emitting the emissions worldwide.

that top 5% is us. i want to move ahead of the curve so we can do this with justice to the people in town who are less privileged than me because we have a huge income disparity. to do it with proper income consideration, we need to move now. we can lead the bay area, california, and the nations and really literally lead the world. it is a crucial moment for climate action everywhere in california to see a change in what we're doing. so i urge you to move forward with no further carve outs. >> clerk: next speaker.

>> i'm a resident of district eight. obviously, as you know, we obviously support this ordinance. we're excited that many of the concerns have been addressed. thank you to supervisor mandelman and also the committee for the time you've put into this ordinance in the last month or so and all the demands on your time. i'm going to take the rest of my time to lay out the work. this is only the beginning. we're succeeding in no longer making the problem worse. we still have to require active construction for new restaurants and a swap with the buyer exception, build our local workforce and knowledge for building these buildings and then we have to retrofit all

existing buildings. this is no small task. the tasks ahead are more daunting and require more will. we cannot afford to address climate change with only the easy stuff. this is easy. the technology is there. we're in a climate emergency and it's time to act like it. please pass this ordinance so it can take effect in january 2021 as promised last year. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

>> i would like to point out one major concern in a proposed solution. this is about the feasibility for the restaurants who need natural gas to cook. a developer may not know what restaurant they would want to have in their new space, unless there is a higher-end restaurant sought after. you need to make sure that the smaller mom-and-pop restaurants have the ability to open in the new developments. we require that new developments can bring in gas lines so that any restaurants requiring a cooking method can change it. it would be in our minds a lot

more small business friendly to have the waiver process for the turn on of gas rather than its installation, assuming that not all restaurants will need this option, but to have the option in place could make-or-break some businesses. we want to make sure that the city of san francisco has the ability to open restaurants in all neighborhoods in san francisco. thank you all for your time again and have a great day. >> [indiscernible] i'm with the family emergency coalition and i live in district five. i've been working

[indiscernible] hearing the concerns, [indiscernible] -- pass this legislation as fast as possible [indiscernible] further prohibiting natural gas [indiscernible] -- as a previous caller has said the infrastructure can be used for up to 50 years. to what we do now will have long-term impacts [indiscernible]. this is a crucial moment for

climate action in california. please pass an all-electric use construction ordinance [indiscernible]. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. you have two minutes. >> hello, supervisors. good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to comment. i work at an independent non-profit looking to shift to a low-carbon future. [indiscernible] -- i'm asking for you to approve the passage of the ordinance. moreover, r.m.i. is recommending to the full board an all-electric new construction ordinance without amendments to close the financial feasibility loopholes.

feasibility should be determined without regard to financial area or amenity related losses. safeguard the community from the toxic side effects of natural gas by scoping the chinatown cultural exemption as narrowly as possible. natural gas is a killer both indoors and out. leaks in our pipes cause health issues. even with properly functioning ventilation, there is a risk of health issues. [indiscernible] every single new building allowed to add gas

infrastructure unnecessarily adds harms for new generations. electric new buildings are the first step in addressing the climate emergency. this ordinance has been over a year in the making. it must be passed now. please pass this ordinance. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. we have 17 listeners and five in the queue. >> i'm [indiscernible] emergency climate coalition. [indiscernible] -- leading to at

least 30 more annual hospital visits by children. we have more acute and concentrated [indiscernible] further burden low-income communities. there is no excuse of a further delay [indiscernible] the climate change impacting generations through decades to come. i want you to look into every parents' eyes and tell them you did everything you could possible. this policy is just the first step towards protecting all of our health and it's taken far too long given what's at stake. [indiscernible] annually in

health benefits to the greater san francisco area. commercial electrification will be roughly double that, contributing $2.5 billion. [indiscernible] i want to see san francisco and those in power leading. please pass this ordinance with no further carve outs so we can get to the hard work in the next steps [indiscernible] health solutions. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> thank you all for your work on this ordinance. it has taken a lot of people, people in the community, myself included, who have worked on this for about a year and a half. i am in district nine. i will note only that when

things are changing, we all experience a certain amount of fear and reluctance. the truth is we have to make this change. we cannot continue to allow the burning of natural gas in our buildings. we could consider all the impacts, the fears, the worries, the financial stakes that people in this community have. and it would be in the committees for years. we have to make this change. certainly we need to consider people's jobs and the just transition and the impact this will have on vulnerable communities. but at a certain point, we have to go ahead with this and this is the point. i urge you to vote for this measure today to not add any more exclusions, and to send this off so we can end the process of using natural gas in

our buildings. >> clerk: next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes. >> hi, this gabriel dawson. i'm a resident and a renter in district two. i want to speak in favor of this resolution. i want to echo many of the profound comments already made that this is a critical thing to do for the health people now and the future of our city. i think we should move forward without any exemptions. the financial concerns or the concerns about small businesses don't change the science. if we start doing carve outs for the restaurants and other things, it's complete -- it's not any different than climate denial at this point because the time to act is now and we need to act as strongly as possible

so we can move forward as fast as possible. any time there is a carve out, this dilutes the effectiveness of this action and hurts the health of our residents. this contributes to the catastrophic destruction of our planet that urges many members to move forward as quickly as possible on the legislation without any more exemptions or amendments. this should be thought of as the first step in many intense and drastic actions we need to take as a city to combat climate change and also to deal with things in climate change that we're facing this year and will face more into the future. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

>> hi [indiscernible] i'm calling so that y'all know we support the immediate adoption of this ordinance and also acknowledge the concerns raised by local 28. we're appreciative of the work that supervisor mandelman has tak taken. we commit to supporting supervisor mandelman and local 38 to find a path forward. this is a critical moment for san francisco and california [indiscernible] san francisco can and will make a huge impact on the state. we really hope to work with multiple cities in san francisco

and for the governor to encourage a state-wide ordinance. there is still a lot of work to be done to pass this. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> i'm a constituent in district three. we all know the science. we have less than 10 years to take climate action and this will be a major first step [indiscernible] prohibiting the natural gas in our buildings is important to me because i'm concerned about climate change. we need to do something about it right now. this is a crucial moment for climate change [indiscernible] climate solutions.

>> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, i'm a resident of district three. i wanted to say thanks to supervisors mandelman and dean preston for all their hard work on this. despite the loopholes [indiscernible] ready requirements is a loophole for small development approximates. i want us to continue the path this ordinance will put us on. we've been waiting years for climate change action. frankly, the experience of this process does not bode well for the challenge ahead of us. i applaud supervisor mandelman for doing so much of the heavy lifting and i hope other supervisors will step up.

>> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hello, i'm a constituent in district two. we all know the science and that the window is quickly closing for being able to do anything significant about climate change and global warming. we have [indiscernible] i own an old victorian home. [indiscernible] i even have some fixtures where there is a leak

going up and used to be part of a gaslight. at the same time, an electrical fixture, where you can screw in a light bulb. we are at a [indiscernible] urgent than was the case 140 years ago. so i hope that the board will move on this without any carve outs and to move expeditiously. we have to begin to figure out ways of preserving the future for future generations before we all burn up. so i do want san francisco to lead in this regard and task the all-electric reconstruction ordinance and get working on climate solutions right away. thank you very much. qulnchts thank you for your

time. next speaker, please. you'll>> clerk: thank you for y time. next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes. >> i want to commend san francisco for passing this ordinance and the process of doing that. i think it's important you understand the three safety issues of not going ahead with this. the first would be the effect of the carbon dioxide in the sphere. the natural gas is equal to the combustion of natural gas. by not doing this, we're putting burning coal into the atmosphere. the second thing is the nitrogen dioxide from cooking is harmful to young asthma patients and we need to move away from that.

the third is there's been explosions, one of which on your door shep [indiscernible] killed eight people. for safety's sake, please go ahead with this as soon as possible. we [indiscernible] thank you>> clerk: i believe that was our last caller. can you confirm if there are any more callers? >> operator: that was the last caller. >> clerk: mr. chair. >> chair: madam clerk. >> clerk: that was our last caller. >> chair: i understand that. i believe that supervisor safai had a comment.

>> thank you, mr. chair. again, i just want to thank supervisor mandelman and his team for keeping us informed and the department of environment for staying on top of this in terms of getting information to us and answering all of our questions. the office of economic and workforce development for working with us. i'm happy to say that the majority of the questions i had last week we have an answer or a path forward on. with regard to the development agreement, office of economic workforce and development is going to continue to work with the d.b.i. on their administrative bulletin. i think supervisor mandelman might have referenced that, but in terms of the impairment language and the process of implementation, i think we narrowed it down to essentially treasure island that had some of

the most reservations. i think with the impairment language and working with d.b.i. and the impairment bulletins, we're going to get there. i think the good news is a lot of the horizontal development has done, but there is still room for changes to the vertical development. so all the folks that called, i think that is one we can check off. i think we're good. i'm not asking for any amendments or adjustments. the second thing is the building trade adjustments. i know supervisor mandelman cares about that. i want to reiterate my support for there to be further conversations, working with the building trades and local 38 in particular. if there's way i'm happy to do.

the one issue that is perplexing to me and it is on the conversation around transformers, i just know from practice over the years that i worked with the planning and the building department and those proposing developments, that they can have standoff and de y delay. [indiscernible] -- i want to continue to work on the issue. i'm going to ask the committee to duplicate the file so we can work on that. i think that will be a continued, positive step because if we continue to work that out, it will capture more buildings and allow for buildings to be all electric in cases they might not be. the way i understand the issue

is we can't just make a blanket statement which will allow for all buildings to transform in the public right of way. there has to be a review of the process. we intend for that to be the case. i would like to work with those. the last issue is a very, very small subset of what chair peskin said, in instances with restaurants and new construction. i understand the language that was put in that says someone can go through the process of appealing and asking for a waiver. it's just a process of how that plays out in real life. if you are intending to put in a waiver, it is financially infeasible and possibly

technically infeasible after the fact if the lines are not there. that's along thing we're going to look at in our duplicated file so we can finalize those last ones. one will be the climate action club and wanting to see more buildings have more electric. that will be a positive step in dealing with the transformers. and the restaurant issue, i think because we created a process for a waiver, it has to be an actual and usable process for a waiver. i think there's more work to be done there. i would make a motion to duplicate the file. i don't know if i need a second for that. >> no, you don't. you can do that as a matter of right, as a member of this committee, supervisor. >> correct. and in the convening week, i will work on both issues, but

certainly the restaurant issue because i think that is something that can be worked on more quickly. we have made progress since this was introduced in june. i know it's been awkward about since last year, but it was definitely introduced in june. you're beating my timeline in terms of when supervisor peskin worked on the inclusionary housing and how much time it took from the beginning of the spring all the way to thanksgiving. this has gone at a very accelerated pace. i believe and agree that our environmental crisis demands that we do that. it's just these last two issus.s

>> chair: thank you, supervisor. >> let me just start by thanking you for all the work that has gone into this clearly. everyone mentioned, particularly the environmental advocates who have held all of our collective feet to the fire, appropriately so, in trying to push things forwa

forward, particularly what we've heard about from the chinese chamber and building trades. there is a collective hearing from colleagues and shared by our other colleagues on the board to seriously engage around the just transition issues around this legislation moves forward. supervisor mandelman, through the chair, thank you for your work on this over what i think has been about a year balancing the interests. there is an urgent impact in terms of the overall emissions, household and family health and safety.

i would like to be added as a co-sponsor and i would like to move this item to the full board with recommendation. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor. ms. rafael from the department of the environment, i would like you to speak to the legislation in general and the amendments that you have heard this afternoon. the floor is yours.

>> chair: where are you? >> i see myself but not on the screen. >> that's a background in san pablo bay. >> chair: i thought your office was getting better. >> i didn't realize that was my background. i'm not speaking from there, but my home office. i'm very grateful. the issues raised are important and fair. we cannot -- supervisor peskin, you brought this up in the very first hearing that is critical for our society. i feel like the department of

building inspection and all the other city agency agencies willn this. i am committed to working with everyone and excited to get going. thank you for this opportunity. >> chair: thank you, ms. rafael. do you do that in conjunction with the office of economic and workforce development or do you have that function within your department? >> we work very closely with joaquin tores and the office of development. we will be working with them to get developers ready to comply with this ordinance and to understand the legalities of their compliance, what those

issues are. and of course we work very closely with them on labor and workforce development as well. one of the benefits of this ordinance is the opportunity for green jobs and to support retraining of folks and new training of folks to benefit from the green economy. >> chair: ms. rafael earlier the chief sponsor supervisor mandelman spoke to that exact concept as it relates to recycled water that has proven very successful in other communities. it may or may not be a good fit for san francisco given how old it is. any comments on that? >> that would be speaking out of my expertise range. my colleagues in the p.u.c. are much more knowledgeable than

that. clearly the concept of recycled water and using as much water resources outside of our groundwater is attractive and important. the feasibility of it is. i don't have the expertise to comment on it. >> chair: thank you, ms. rafael. supervisor safai, would you like to make a motion to continue the duplicated file to the call of the chair as you work on the mentioned amendments that you are working on? >> i would, mr. chair, but can we make it continued to next week because i believe i'll have it continued to then. >> chair: absolutely. if you make a motion to duplicate the file to november the 2nd.

>> so moved. >> chair: madam clerk, on that motion, a roll call. [ roll call ] >> chair: then i believe that supervisor preston made a motion to move this file that was amended, which amendments were substantive a week ago, and i will add there may be some amendments at the full board that would not be substantive that sponsor mandelman and co-sponsor preston are working on. on that motion made by supervisor preston, send this item as previously amended with

recommendation and the understanding that there could be more substantive changes at the full board. on that motion, a roll call. >> can we clarify this amendment? >> there is no amendment. the item was amended a week ago. there were no amendments made or offered today. i was merely saying for the record to all that are listening -- and i could drill down into this a little bit. supervisor mandelman and i have significant conversations today about the board of examiners, which appellate body has met two times in the next three years. we may only go to the board

appeals. those things could happen at the full board next week. they are non-substantive in nature. i was saying to the public that there may be some amendments that are forthcoming. but your motion to move this to the full board with recommendation is before us on that motion. madam clerk, a roll call. [ roll call ]]. >> chair: next item, please>> clerk: item 2 is an ordinance amending the administrative code to require sellers of multifamily residential buildings to provide a new right of first offer and right of first refusal to qualified nonprofit organizations if a multifamily residential building is not

under contract or remains unsold after one year and after each year thereafter; require sellers to provide additional disclosures to qualified nonprofit organizations; provide information to current tenants, and assist qualified nonprofits with due diligence; and allow multifamily residential buildings acquired by qualified nonprofit organizations under the community opportunity to purchase act . members of the public should call the number streaming on the screen, 415-655-0001, and use access code 146 347 8588. press pound and pound again. mr. chair. >> chair: supervisor fewer, the floor is yours. we continued this as amended to today's meeting. if you have any comments, the floor is yours. >> thank you. supervisor fewer is not able to be here today. i am the legislative aide to supervisor fewer. good afternoon, supervisors.

thank you for having me. as you just mentioned, chair peskin, at last week's hearing supervisor fewer spoke about the purpose of this legislation and thanked all of our community partners and co-sponsors for all of their support on this. as you all know, the community opportunity to purchase act has helped our qualified non-profits purchase apartment buildings that are at risk of losing their affordability and preserve them as permanent affordable housing. this prevents the displacement of vulnerable tenants. i want to reiterate what this legislation before you today does to enhance copa. this is really based on the experience from our non-profits on the ground over the past year. this legislation will make it

easier for qualified non-profits to decide whether to make an offer on a building by requiring the seller to provide them with more complete disclosures, provide more engagement with tenants by requiring sellers to provide an information sheet about copa. add clarifying language to further prevent off-market sales, will prevent megalandlords from dumping dozens of buildings on the market at the same time and overwhelming qualified non-profits as a result. this will require sellers to renotify qualified non-profits and provide them a new opportunity to purchase the building if it remains on the market after one year. also it's going to allow qualified non-profits the option to convert