>> supervisor ronen: good morning, everyone. the meeting will come to order. good morning and welcome to the november 16, 2020, meeting of the rules committee. with me is vice chair catherine

stefani and supervisor victor mar. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes. [agenda item rea

>> supervisor ronen: thank you, mr. clerk. can you please read items number 1 and 2 together. >> clerk: yes. item number 1 is a motion approving or rejecting the mayor's nomination for the reappointment of mark dunlop to the treasure island development authority board of directors for a term ending february 26, 2024. item 2 is a motion approving or rejecting the mayor's nomination for the appointment of julia prochnik to the

treasure island development authority board of directors, for a term ending february 26, 2021. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. and i just would like everyone to know that mr. dunlop is not here because he's not feeling well. normally, i would ask that the item be continued, but i think it would be okay to hear this today. i would call tyra funnell in case she wants to say a few words on behalf of mr. dunlop. >> yes. can you hear me? >> supervisor ronen: yes, go ahead. >> mark dunlop has been a positive asset to the commission for quite

sometime -- sorry, since -- yeah, so we're requesting that he be reappointed to an expiration term of 2024. i just want to go over some basic things about mr. dunlop who unfortunately cannot attend the meeting because he's not feeling well. mr. dunlop has been active in organizations and charities throughout the day for 30 years and works to organize for core patients for aids and hiv, diseases that he's been living with for quite sometime. he was on the san francisco hiv planning council in '97 and a chairman of the committee. so he's been very active in the community and his dedication to the city is very, very clear in his file. he was appointed by mayor agnos

to the mayor's development committee and was nominated to the san francisco development commission where he served as president and vice president, and then, by another mayor, mayor newsom, was appointed to the human rights commission and lastly, in 2010, to tida. he's been on tida for quite sometime, has been consistent, reliable, and he was reappointed in 2012 by mayor lee, and we hope that today, he will be reappointed by the board of supervisors, but, first and foremost, by the rules committee members, and that's pretty much the roundup of mr. dunlop unless you guys have questions. >> supervisor ronen: thank you so much. really appreciate you speaking on behalf of mr. dunlop, and i don't see any questions from my

colleagues, so thank you very much, miss funnell, and we are good to move on next to julia prochnik. >> good. thank you. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. is miss prochnik here? >> yes. i just, again, want to thank the mayor for nominating me and for the time today with the rules committee. it's great to see all of you, and i'm just thrilled to be here. as many of you know, i've lived in this city for over ten years. i have two small children in public school, and really am excited to be part of this process. i have my own company that i've

started in covid, promoting world energy in the grid, working with building infrastructure, working with helping frontline communities helping transition from fossil fuel. i've been working in states across the nation and am thrilling to be offering my expertise in my own backyard. i've been active in my community because i believe in the people of san francisco. i really believe in equity and transition, and currently am the chairman of the lower haight merchants association. i really appreciate my time on tida and appreciate all the support from commissioners and board members. i've learned what's going on on

treasure island with tolls, with education, with action, with inclusivity and action. i want to listen and do more and be part of the solution going forward. i'm thrilled to be part of the team and it's a true honor. i'm thrilled to be here today, so thank you all very much. >> supervisor ronen: thank you so much for your willingness to serve in this capacity. i just had one question for you. how would you support the current and existing businesses especially during the clean-up process if you are appointed to this board? >> definitely. in a variety of ways. one, with the rolling blockouts that continue to happen, there are a variety of solutions, and i've spoken with many residents and the tida staff to talk about various solutions.

i think there's some more opportunities there, so i want to have some more conversations for financing and green solutions. there should be a lot more work done in the community. it's not just a holding pattern, waiting for the next thing. i've driven around and walked through the community, and there's a lot of dust piles. there's open areas where we can really make sure that the kids are allowed to play outside and really make sure that there's no ongoing health concerns, so there's a couple of concerns with energy and the ongoing construction. i've been fortunate to hangout with various residents about the transportation and kind of undergrounding of wires, so there's a long list of solutions. i pride myself on being a bridge builder, and i think there's a lot of work we can do

right now. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. i appreciate that. it looks like neither of my colleagues have any questions, so now, we can open up these two items for public comment. each member of the public will have two minutes to speak on both items. >> clerk: yes. members of the public who wish to comment should call 415-655-0001 and enter the meeting i.d. press pound, and pound again. press star, three to enter the queue for public comment. do we have any callers on the line for public comment?

>> operator: yes, i have one caller in the queue. >> clerk: hello. if the public commenter is on the line, you may begin at this time. madam chair, that completes the queue. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. >> hello, can you hear me? >> supervisor ronen: yes, we can hear you. hello? >> wonderful. can you hear me?

>> ye >> supervisor ronen: yes, we can hear you. >> i'm sorry. that was entirely my fault. i was on mute, and i couldn't see. i am [inaudible] and i'm also the chairman of the lower haight founders and merchants association, and i have been honored to be working with julia over the last couple of years, and i want to voice my support even though it comes with a little bit of sadness because she will not be able to continue working with the lower haight merchants association going forward. i started working with julia in 2014, and since i met her, she's gone from a person who is extremely passionate and knowledgeable about the environment, having worked with a variety, and now starting her

own climate business, to a political leader on the lower haight board and this year's president, and she's done a phenomenal job in pivoting our merchants and neighbors association to one focused on activities where we all get to see each other to one that allows others to shine and supports them as they create such things as volunteer brigades to check on seniors and disabled and voluntary services for our seniors and restaurants so we can make sure that they can continue to be supported during this difficult time. i just called in to say that she would be a fabulous addition to the tida, treasure island development authority, and i would be delighted to

support her in this role, as well. >> supervisor ronen: thank you very much for your comments, miss selby. are there any other members of the public that would like to comment? >> clerk: madam chair, that completes the queue. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. public comment is closed. supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: yes. i just wanted to say, i've known julia for years as a fellow emerge partner. i just want to emphasize her environment equity and environmental justice experience. i believe this is a perfect appointment for tida, and i'm very happy to see her in this role and i'm very excited. thank you, julia, for your

willingness in this role and to serve. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. miss prochnik, i just have one quick question for you. i agree that both these appointments are -- miss furrell, i just have one quick question for you. i agree that both of these appointments are extremely qualified, but i'm wondering why the mayor didn't choose people who lived in the neighborhood. >> i think that mr. dunlop has served that community for years, but we feel that miss prochnik years of serving the

community and environment as well as her dovetail doing community work will serve tida. in terms of her in particular, we thought her environmental experience would be really useful. >> supervisor ronen: okay. i appreciate that. it's just a note that our residents of the haight, it just seems like this would be a board that would benefit from people that live or work on treasure island, but i hear you, and agree that these are very qualified appointments to these seats and san franciscans that are clearly willing to do public service in their -- in their areas of expertise, so i'm prepared to support them. i just hope that in the future, the majority of these

appointments will come from treasure island. thank you. and with that, i'm wondering, supervisor stefani, if you want to do the honors of making the motion? >> supervisor stefani: sure. thank you, chair ronen. yes, i would like to move to approve the appointment of both mark dunlop and julia prochnik to the treasure island authority board board of directors and strike the rejecting language and move that forward to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> chair ronen: thank you. can we have a roll call vote on those motions? >> clerk: certainly. [roll call] >> clerk: the motion passes without objection. >> chair ronen: thank you so much, and thank you, miss prochnik for your willingness

to lend your expertise in this way. we thank you. mr. clerk, can you please read item number 3. >> clerk: item number 3 is a hearing to consider appointing three members for an indefinite term, to the treasure island development authority citizens advisory board. >> chair ronen: thank you, and i believe that courtney mcdonald from supervisor haney's office will be joining us as 10:30 -- at 10:30 in case we have any questions from her, but in the meantime, let me hear from the applicants. is amalia leamon here? if miss leamon wants to speak, and tell us why you're interested in this position.

>> clerk: i did hear from miss leamon, and she is unsure if she was still interested in applying for the seat, as she has moved off the island, but she was not sure if she was going to attend today's meeting. >> chair ronen: okay. courtney mcdonald is here from supervisor haney's office, so let's hear from her first. >> great. thank you, chair ronen. i'm courtney mcdonald from supervisor matt haney's office, and i want to say thank you and congratulations to mark and julia. we look forward to working with both of you.

for the citizen's advisory board, i appreciate your effort, chair ronen, to make sure that we are hearing community members' voices. it's important that we appoint people there to the board that live on the island, and three of the applicants fit that need. the first is hope williams. she's open to community hubs, establish testing, distributed p.p.e. she has really been the heart of organizing on treasure island, and what her application doesn't say that if you need something done on the island, you need hope, you need her right there with you. she has the trust of families and residents on the island from decades of organizing,

from habitability to the cleanup, so her voice on the c.a.b. is really important. the second is barklee unitas. he has gone out and sought partnerships to fix the issues on the island, and his voice, we believe, is really critical, to holding the tida board and our board of supervisors accountable. and lastly, jim hancock, or james hancock, as he's listed on his application, has gone above and beyond to engage with the sailing community. he's been a huge part of the

treasure island sailing center. he's very diligently attended the c.a.b. meetings, the tida meetings, and partnered with people for cleanups at the sailing center, so these three applicants really embody what we're looking for in representatives on our community advisory board, and i know the clerk mentioned that amalia might not be interested anymore, but we want to thank her for her interest in applying on these seats. i know there's a number of applications that have since expired, but i want to also thank them. lastly, i believe the policy is they all have the same applications, and i believe the three applicants meet the policy needs. so that's all, and i'm happy to

answer any questions if you have them. >> chair ronen: thank you, miss mcdonald. i don't see any questions, so we will now here from barklee unitas-ali sanders. >> hi. i'm barklee unitas-ali sanders. so like courtney was calling out, i have been very involved in trying to bring transparency to the power outages on treasure island. i've reached out and provided

information, and that's why i want to serve on the board to be able to provide information to citizens on the outages. also because i'm a veteran, i feel like i can give focus to the veterans and help them navigate their way out of homelessness and to self-sufficiency. i also grew up in an underprivileged perspective, and i've made it out of there. i would like the community to transition out of that dependency. there is a large portion of the island that is transitioning out of homelessness, aged out youth for foster care to different job corps program. so i'm just interested in being an active part of the community. i have a career in i.t.

support, so i love to be of service to people and help them get questions answered, and if i don't personally know the answer myself, i love to research the answer and connect people to resources, and i believe that's a great way for people to get their questions answered, their voices heard, and feel not only like they're a part of the community but a part of the government experience so they can get the things that they're needed in their communities. >> chair ronen: wonderful. thank you very much for being so willing to answer our questions. and i'll just move onto hope williams, and i just want to say, miss williams, that your representation precedes you. i've learned so much about you,

particularly from commissioner collins on the school board. but everyone speaks so highly of you, and so it's so nice to see your face and to finally hear from you directly. just know that many people speak very highly of you in the community. good morning. >> good morning, and i hope -- i really want to say the same thing to you. it's been an honor on working on a number of the community hubs, and just to put it out there, i am -- as soon as the seat opens, i do wish to reappointment, so i'll keep my name there. i'm really coming to treasure island just to continue the work. i wrote something, and i got a little choked up just reading it. i am a humble servant doing this work. i am a san francisco resident, formerly homeless. i have been odd row indicating

for residents -- advocating for residents throughout the city for over 25 years, and just being a tool to the community. i serve on the preterm birth initiative for ucsf, which is geared towards addressing health disparities for african american, pacific islander, and latinx populations. as you know, i -- and courtney kind of just put it out there about the covid. i'm still on the groundworking. i am on -- every friday, i am out here, feeding the community, seeking out donations. in august, we just recently launched our community board to try to bring residents together

so that they have a voice and a safe place. we are an under serve -- underserved community, but my goal as a board member is to bring attention to the needs that are here, but not just talking about them, but finding ways to work with agencies and organizations and continue building a relationship with tida board and strategic solutions to the organizations that exist, seeing how we can bring more organizations so that we're not focusing on just the communities to come, but how do we support the residents that are here, okay? i have the honor of talking to julie. i'm very close with my supervisor, the school board. as you know, i'm in every

meeting. i'm in e-mail with, and residents have my cell phone number. i let them know i am here 100% to support you. so this would give me an opportunity to take this information and be a better tool so that i can be a mentor to the advocates who have been doing this for 30 years but may not have been successful, that i'm able to restore that hope back into them, that they can impact their community, and then just slowly transition, that once they're strong enough, to be able to leave. so that's really my hope in this position, and just to continue to move up, to advocate, to continue bringing attention to why we need affordable housing here, coming up with solutions, and really working with the city in any way possible to be a resource. and not just treasure island, but really expanding out to all

of district 6 and how we can work together, so that is my goal and what i'll try to do. >> chair ronen: yea! first, t.i. is so lucky to have you, and we're so thankful you're willing to take on another volunteer role. we can't thank you enough, and thank you for your service to the city. i don't see any other questions for you, so last, but certainly not least, is james hancock here? >> i am here, and good morning, supervisors, and thank you, hillary, and thank you for that nice introduction. well, my first involvement with treasure island in any material way came in 2016, when i got a position working as a coach at

the sailing center there. it was with the adult program, and very quickly, i moved out to an opportunity to do mentorship to the young people in the program. and they'd say thank you. the life lessons that i taught them in this program went way beyond sailing, and i continue today do that. for some time, i had contemplated the idea of creating a science center that could be used to teach stem education really to the public but have it focused around sailing, and when i got to treasure island, i thought this could be an ideal place to do that. the treasure island sailing center, it's the only community

sailing center and only nonprofit sailing center in the community of san francisco. it's quite different from most. you know, it's mostly, the boats are small. small boats. most of the students are kids who come from san francisco and the east bay. it's very gran orientifying to work with the sailing center, but the treasure island sailing center, we got that off the ground in 2018, when we incorporated it as a california nonprofit public benefit corporation and then got our tax exempt status. you know, in the past year, we've started, in july, our diversity, equity, and

inclusiveness initiative, as courtney mentioned, and i think courtney, you must be paying attention to our newsletters. we did have a beach cleanup in september, and we've been involved with one museum on treasure island, the treasure island museum, and also, all the constituents on the island try to be as involved as possible. since 2018, we've held an office at the treasure island administration building, and really, what we're trying to do is bring in reinforcements and just good activities at treasure island, and i think that, you know, all of what's happening on treasure island is very exciting. the development, it's sort of a once-in-a-lifetime development,

and it would be such an honor to be a part of that and help shape it. >> chair ronen: well, thank you so much, as well. i feel like the t.i. is in good hands with these applicants, and so i appreciate your service. i don't believe there are any other questions from my colleagues, and so we will now open up this item for public comment. >> clerk: yes. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146-980-5384, and press pound, and pound again. if you haven't already done so, press star, three to lineup to speak. please wait until the system indicates you are unmuted to

begin your comment. mr. q., do we have any public comment? >> operator: yes, i have two callers in the queue. >> oh, good morning, supervisors. my name is [inaudible] i'm an organizer in the mission. i'm calling in to extend my support and ask that you grand miss hope the seat for the citizens advisory board. i've had the pleasure of organizing and working with her, and her heart is with the people, and it's really important to have people from the treasure island neighborhood to speak on behalf of the community, and i think she's an exemplary figure for that. so i hope you hear this out, and i'm looking forward to celebrating her seat on the board. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we hear from the next caller, please?

>> supervisors, my name is francisco dacosta. i've been involved with treasure island since 1999, when i worked for the presidio. the rules commit htee has to te this matter very seriously. if you don't read the various type of contamination that's on treasure island, much like it's on hunters point naval shipyard, if you don't care about the people that have come down with cancer, and you're, like, laughingly encourage people to get into this work,

which is like sending people in harm's way, nothing much has changed about you all. when you're a supervisor, it's very important that you protect and think about the welfare and quality of life issues. so i know these candidates, some of them may know a little bit, but some of them may think that just because they're getting this position on the citizens advisory board, that they can do something. the contamination, that means the abatement and mitigation of treasure island, is not being done properly. there are some advocates, like carol harvey, steve goettler and others, who are -- they speak their minds, and they really care for the people, so

supervisors, don't take this as a joke. i see some of you all smiling, oh, for taking this appointment. don't lead people into harm's way. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. mr. q., do we have any additional speakers? >> operator: madam chair, that completes the queue. >> chair ronen: okay. then public comment is closed. thanks for voicing your opinion, and since i see no requests to speak from my colleagues, i'm happy to make a motion to forward the appointments of barklee sanders to seat one, hope williams to seat two, and james hancock to seat 8 with a positive recommendation. can i please have a roll call on that motion.

>> clerk: on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: the motion passes without objection. >> chair ronen: thank you, and thank you, mr. sanders, miss williams, and mr. hancock, for your willingness to serve this community so well and for all the time that you put into this as community volunteers. we appreciate it. thank you. mr. clerk, can you please read item number 4 -- oh, i'm sorry. can you please read items number 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 together. >> clerk: yes. item number 4 is a motion approving or rejecting the mayor's nomination for reappointment of ellen schumer to the city hall preservation advisory commission, term ending january 13, 2022.

item 5 is a motion approving or rejecting the mayor's nomination for reappointment of mae woo to the city hall preservation advisory commission, term ending january 13, 2020. item number 6 is a motion approving or rejecting the mayor he's nomination for appointment of robert vergara to the city hall preservation advisory commission, term ending january 13, 2024. item 7 is a motion aprofession or rejecting the mayor's nomination for repayment of james haas to the. >> supervisor stefani: preservation advisory commission, term ending january 13, 2024. and item 8 is a motion approving or rejecting the

mayor's nomination for reappointment of patrick carney to the city hall preservation advisory commission, term ending january 13, 20 24r this. >> chair ronen: thank you. and since all of these are nominations to the city hall preservation committee mayor's nomination, i will let them all speak at once, starting with ellen schumer. >> thank you. the commission has worked over the years to maintain the historical significance of the building. it has been a pleasure to work with all of the team members, and i hope we can continue to

work as hard as we did before the building was closed, and we can breathe a sigh of relief and begin again. thank you for the opportunity to serve the number of years that i have served on the commission, and hopefully, i'm looking forward to many more. thank you. >> chair ronen: thank you so much, miss schumer. i must say that i miss seeing your beautiful face every morning walking into city hall, and your gorgeous outfits. >> well, it matches the building. >> chair ronen: well, you represent the building in your

beauty and style, and your style is just so gorgeous. i just appreciate how many years you have worked to make this treasure a living treasure and one that so many people come to visit, from kids to tourists. your work is extraordinary. thank you for everything and all the work that you've done for our beloved city hall. >> well, thank you for the comments. it's wonderful to hear them. >> chair ronen: no problem. thanks again. next, we will hear from m mae woo. mr. clerk, is mae woo with us today? >> clerk: she is currently logged in. she just needs to -- she was -- she is present -- oh, there she

is. [inaudible]. >> chair ronen: i think she has a bad connection. miss woo, if you can hear us, we can't hear you very well, and there's a scratchiness on the line, so i'm going to go ahead and move on, and maybe you can come back in with a better connection. thank you. thank you so much. now we'll hear from robert vergara. >> yes. good morning, supervisors. >> chair ronen: good morning. >> thank you for inviting me to be here.

this would be my first appointment to the city hall preservation advisory commission. i've been teaching history at st. ignatius high school for 39 years, and the last three years, i've been teaching a course on san francisco history and politics, and that includes a field trip to city hall where we're led by miss schumer. mayor moscone's son, chris, has visited my class, as well as former mayor art agnos. it was great to watch this 80-year-old man interacting

with the students. rob rider has also walked me through brooks hall, the city's attic. i was born here, and i've been studying the history of san francisco since i was a young boy, and my father would drive me around and point out historical places. when my students visit city hall, i tell them to try to put themselves in the position of the first people in there in 1906. so much has happened in that building. i feel my background as an educator could be helpful to the commission because i know that part of its work is

educating the public about the building and its uses. i think i can be helpful in making progress toward the raising of money for the upkeep. i understand that one of the projects is the resurfacing of the dome, so any way that i can be helpful, i'd love to do so. thanks for considering me. >> chair ronen: thank you so much for applying. you seem like a perfect addition to the body. thanks again, and i don't see any questions from my colleagues, and so we will move onto mr. james haas, which is a reappointment. >> yes, good morning, supervisors. am i connected? >> chair ronen: yes. >> well, i'm pleased to have the confidence of the mayor to reappointment me, and i hope i'll have your confidence to confirm that appointment. i lived at 100 vanness, so i see city hall every day from my

apartment. i've been involved in work to improve the area over the last 30 years, and i even wrote a book about city hall for the university of nevada, published last year. i'm on the board of the community benefits district, which has been around nine years. i think i'm being reappointed to the city hall preservation advisory commission. in the years that i have been on the commission, we've been involved with all sorts of issues leading to maintenance of the building, and we've appeared a couple of times before the capital improvements committee to advocate for additional funds for things. all the money that was spent on

rehabilitating the building did not include moneys to fix the dome windows, which continue to remain an outstanding issue and, at some point, could blow in. in terms of what i -- what my goals are, it is to fulfill the original purpose of the -- of the legislation, which is to keep the building in excellent shape, in the same shape as it was when it opened in 1996, to make the building as welcoming to everybody as possible, and as supervisor stefani knows, we have a tremendous amount of weddings that go on in there, and we need to make sure that everybody feels comfortable in all aspects of the building. and thirdly, i have been trying

to promote city hall and san francis francisco -- and civic center. it is the largest collection of monumental municipal buildings in the united states, and it often gets ignored by our local promotion and advertising people as well as nationally, so one reason i wrote the book related to that, and i do make as much effort as i can to do that. so i would like to continue my work, and i would appreciate your support. thank you. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. thanks for all your work. make sure our city hall remains relevant and accessible to

everybody. and our last person is mr. carney. >> clerk: i believe that miss woo has called in. >> chair ronen: okay. mr. carney, if you could wait until miss woo. >> hello? >> chair ronen: hello. how are you? >> how do i come on? i don't know because i'm having difficulty, it looks like. >> chair ronen: i don't know what was wrong, but it looks like you're able to share now. please comment on how you're able to promote this role for the city. >> i'm sorry. i'm not hearing you. >> chair ronen: okay. if you could let us know your role for the city. >> am i to talk now?

>> chair ronen: yes. >> okay. thank you for having me on. i would love to comment on what i have to say. i don't know what i'm supposed to say, but i'm a native san franciscan, and i've served every mayor since mayor jordan and three governors in san francisco, and, of course, through those years, there was mayor jordan, mayor brown, mayor newsom, governor newsom, and all that. as a matter of fact, i was serving the state when mayor brown was mayor, and [inaudible] who was a governor

at that time, and that was in 2003. so i've been around about -- well, over 30 years serving san francisco and the state and the united states of america, and i'm very proud to say that. i am also very honored to continue serving on the advisory board of the city hall preservation. as a matter of fact, it was mayor newsom who appointed me to come cofound this commission, and that was in 19 -- oh, let's see...it was 1996. so for ten years, i was with the city on this commission.

i originally am in the real estate business, and i am a developer, and at that time, was building shopping centers, and i'm still at it, so to speak. i'm semi retired and devoting my time more volunteering for the community, and i'm a little bit nervous because we got disconnected. i couldn't figure out how it was going on, and things were really not very organized here [inaudible] i'm having a problem with the connection. >> chair ronen: is that better now? >> it's very difficult for me to continue, but if you want me to, i can try.

>> chair ronen: that's okay. i think we -- >> and -- and -- and city hall has my resume and everything all these years. i don't know exactly what else -- i did -- am a founder of a number of organizations locally and internationally, and there is interference. i don't know if i'm talking through. >> chair ronen: can you hear me? can you hear me? is. >> i can hear you more, so i'm not getting it, and of course, i'm using my cell phone, as i was told, because of the difficulty. i think it might be -- oh, i'm

getting feedback. >> chair ronen: miss woo, can you hear me? can you hear me? [inaudible]. >> chair ronen: can you hear me? you've presented enough. thank you, we really appreciate it. >> what was that? >> chair ronen: thank you for your presentation. thank you. thank you. and mr. -- oh, mr. carney, i'm sorry. are you available? >> i am. can you hear me? >> chair ronen: we can hear you perfectly. welcome. >> thank you. well good morning. i am patrick carney. thank you for your time today, and thank you to mayor breed for the reappointment. i am a licensed architect with 35 years experience and have a degree from u.c. berkeley. i was honored to have worked on

the restoration for city hall for four years. i knew the issues facing it then and now the issues now. however, i have the background to know how this beautiful building should be architecturally maintained going forward. during the restoration effort, i was named team liaison for 26 engineering firms and went to meetings with then-mayor willie brown and went on hard-hat tours of the building. since joining the commission, i have made many walk-throughs and pointed out problems to address. i have spoken with city administrator naomi kelly

about -- [inaudible]. >> -- human rights and stopping ha hate crimes. this year, it was eliminated by the masterminds behind the bay bridge lighting, and that was certainly a thrill, and it was up for three weeks and will be back next year for the 2016 triangle. in summary, my main goal for wanting to continue on this

commission overseeing city hall is to make sure the vision of the restoration of the architectural team is maintained and we hopefully will never have to go through another $340 million series of bond measures to bring this building back to what it needed to be, so i wanted to make sure that all the interventions that we went through for four years is maintained and the design is maintained. thank you so much. i appreciate your time. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. thank you for everything you do for the city. >> thank you. >> chair ronen: the pink triangle is one of the best thing about pride time every single year, so thank you. supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: thank you, chair ronen. i just wanted to say this is one of the most important commissions, and we -- like you said at the beginning, our building is so beautiful,

walking into it every day. i miss it so much, walking up that grand staircase and have such incredible stewards of that building. i was fortunate to work with the city hall preservation advisory committee when i was the city clerk. there's a little room off the hall called the marriage ceremony room, and i was able to work with the commission to redo this room in a way that's worthy of city hall. i want to thank miss schumer for her guidance during this process, and i agree everything that you said, supervisor ronen, about her style. i miss everybody so much, and i want to thank mr. vergara. your job sounds amazing. even though my son is at sacred heart, but we are all wildcats,

as well. for mr. haas to write the book that he has, thank you. and there are so many people who come to our beautiful building, the people's palace, to experience what that building means to so much of us. so thank you for your willness willness -- willingness to worserve. it means so much. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. so supervisors -- >> supervisor mar: chair ronen, can i also just add my words? >> chair ronen: yes,

absolutely. please go on. >> supervisor mar: i want to thank everyone for their willingness to serve and especially to mr. vergara, so that an important icon to our city continues to be preserved and used in the best possible way, you know, for our city, so thank you to everyone. thank you, mayor breed, for putting forward reappointments and also the appointments. >> chair ronen: thank you, supervisor mar. the public can see how much we love the people's palace, all of us. it grabs you, and it doesn't let go. so with that, can we please open this item up for public comment? >> clerk: yes. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on these items should call

415-655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146-980-5384, then press pound, and pound again. if you haven't already done so, please press star, three to lineup to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted before beginning your comment. mr. q., do we have any callers lined up for public comment? >> operator: yes, i have two callers in the queue. >> good morning, supervisors. this is tracey everwine, executive director of the civic center community benefit district. i'm calling to express support for jim haas continuing to provide his time and expertise to strengthen the city hall preservation advisory commission. when it comes to the built-in

environments, he truly excels. jim is very hard working, very passionate, and committed, and he's going to be a tremendous resource for the commission and see and county of san francisco. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi, there. this is manny yekutiel. i own a small business in the mission, and i'm a member of the small basusiness commissio. i'm calling in to show my enthusiastic support for jim haas to be reappointed to this body. i feel like we are blessed to have a city hall as inspiring and organized as we do, and we are lucky to have in san

francisco a person like jim haas who has devoted so many years of his san francisco dedicated to making sure that whatever changes are made to it reflect the pride of our city, our state, and the nation as a whole. i know his character, i know how deeply he cares about all this, and so i just wanted to call in and say that he has my support, and i'm very excited for him, and he wants to continue to serve on this important body. thank you so much. >> chair ronen: thank you, manny. >> clerk: mr. q., do we have any additional callers? >> operator: madam chair, that completes the queue. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. then public comment is closed, and i was wondering if supervisor mar wanted to do the honors of making the motions? >> supervisor mar: yes, i'd be happy to. so colleagues, i'd like to move

that we approve or send the -- the appointments -- the reappointments, i'm sorry, of ellen schumer, mae woo, james haas, and patrick carney, and the appointment of robert vergara to the full board with a positive recommendation -- i'm sorry, to the city hall preservation advisory commission to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> clerk: i believe that would be an amendment to remove the word rejecting throughout the legislation and move that to the full board? >> supervisor mar: yes, victor, that's correct. >> chair ronen: can we have a roll call? >> clerk: on that motion -- [roll call]

>> clerk: the motion passes without objection. [inaudible]. >> clerk: we were getting some interference. please try again. >> chair ronen: oh, i just wanted to thank supervisor mar for making the motion and thank all of the appointees for their extraordinary work. thank you. mr. clerk, do we have any other items on the agenda? >> clerk: that completes the agenda for today. >> chair ronen: the meeting is adjourned. thank you, everyone. have a great day.

and supervisor walton, our clerk is john carroll and i, of course, want to thank the folks at sfg tv for staffing this meeting, as well as board of supervisors operations it for their hard work. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements? >> yes, thank you very much, mr. chair. in order to protect the public, board members and city employees during the covid-19 health

emergency, the room is closed. this is taken pursuant to all various local and state federal orders, declarations and directives. committee members will attend this meeting through video conference and participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were physically present in our chamber. public comment will be available for each item on this agenda, both san francisco cable channel 26 and sf gov tv are scrolling a call-in number across the screen. it will be available by phone by calling 1-415-655-0001, and once you've connected you'll be prompted to enter the meeting id, 146-225-1223. following that you will press the pound symbol twice to be connected to the meeting. when you are connected you will hear the meeting discussions but your line will be muted and in a listening mode only. when your item of interest comes

up on our agenda, dial star followed by 3 to be added to the speaker line if you wish to speak to that item. the system prompt will indicate that you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may then begin your comments. call from a quiet location, turn down your television, radio or streaming device. everyone must account for potential time delays and speaking discrepancieses that we may encounter between the live coverage and streaming. alternatively, you may submit public comments in either of the following ways. you may email me, clerk of the committee. my email address is john.ca rroll@sfgov.org. if you submit that comment by email, i will add the comment to the public file for each of the items you comment on. you can send them by u.s. postal service.

the clerk's office is 1 dr. carleton b. goodlet place, room 244. this information is available on the front of the agenda as well for your reference. items acted upon today will appear on the agenda of december 1, 2020, unless otherwise stated. >> thank you, mr. clerk. please call our first item. >> agenda item no. 1 is a hearing to discuss the san francisco housing conservativeship preliminary evaluation report. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this hearing should call the public comment number, 1-415-655-0001. enter today's meeting id, 146-225-1223. press the pound symbol twice to connect to the meeting and then press the star key. the system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may then begin your

comments. mr. chair? >> the chair: so, colleagues, this has been a very long hearing. we began it back in june, and to refresh everyone's memory, in june i was concerned that the -- my office had heard concerns about the fact that the 1045 program which the city had opted into about a year prior at that point, or more than a year prior, had still not resulted in a single petition for an sb1045 conservatorship. we began this hearing in june to understand what the reasons for the delay were and received assurances from public health and the office of the public conservator had made progress, that they had been delayed by covid and other things, but they were on the cusp of, in fact, being able to bring a petition. we had them back in july and

again heard that they were making progress but had not yet been able to identify a candidate or bring a petition. we skipped august. we decided to give them a little bit of time and had them back in september, and september again heard much the same, that they were making progress but still had not quite gotten around to bringing a petition. at that september meeting i decided again to give them, you know, a little more time until today, november. it's been basically two months since then, six months since we had our hearing because it had taken seemingly far too long, six months ago, to bring a single petition under sb1045. i said in september that if the petition had not been filed -- petition had not been filed by the date of this hearing that i would no longer be berating the staff in these departments and i would want to hear from the directors, from grant colfax and

trent lohr, and in fact here we are november 12, not a single one has been filed, and so i do think it begs a deeper question about what we are even doing with this program if we intend to pursue it, if not why not, and what we are going to do about the population of folks that sb1045 was supposed to address. unfortunately director colfax is not able to be here today, and so i do want to hear from him, and i will be making a motion to continue this hearing to our next regular meeting in december where we will be i hope hearing from directors colfax and lohr about sb1045 implementation and the issues that the city's difficulties in implementing this very small program raises.

so i'll make that motion. we will need to take public comment on the motion, or on the continuance. is there no comments from colleagues, which i do not see, let's open this up to public comment. >> thank you, mr. chair. do we have any callers in the queue for this agenda item one. for those already connected to our meeting via phone, please press star followed by 3 at this time if you wish to speak on agenda item no. 1. for those already on hold in the queue, please wait until you are prompted to begin. you will hear a prompt that informs you your line has been unmuted. for those watching our meeting on cable channel 26 or streaming item, please call in now if you wish to speak on this item. that would be by dialing 1-415-655-0001, enter the meeting id for today's meeting, which is 146-225-1223, press

pound and then star three to speak. could you connect us to our first caller? >> operator: there are no callers in the queue. >> i will not say a few more things about public comment and i will close public comment. i have made a motion. mr. clerk, please call the roll. >> on the motion offered by chair mandleman, that this hearing be continued to the date of december 10 meeting, that being the next committee meeting. vice chair stephanie? >> aye. >> member walton? >> aye. >> supervisor mandelman? >> aye. >> the motion passes. >> we can call our next item. >> agenda item no. 2 is an

ordinance amending the health code to prohibit smoking in all dwelling units in multi-housing complexes containing three or more units and all common areas. to remove the exception for child care facilities located in private homes, to require the department of public health to initiate a public information campaign to raise awareness of the smoking prohibition, to require the department of public health to initiate the imposition of -- the suspend the provision of the health code -- by this ordinance which requires owners or managers of multi-unit housing complexes to provide certain disclosures regarding whether smoking is authorized in certain units. and affirming the -- determination provided by the planning department. members of the public who wish to provide public on this ordinance should call the public comment number. i will repeat it.

1-415-655-0001. after you've connected to that call, enter today's meeting id. today's meeting id is 146-225-1225. press pound twice and then star and then three to enter the queue to speak. a system prompt will indicate that you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates that your line has been unmuted. that will be your opportunity to provide your public comment on this agenda item. mr. chair? >> the chair: thank you, mr. clerk. president ye, i believe you are here. >> yes, i am. >> thank you. take it away. >> thank you, chair maendelman. thank you for hearing me on this item today. i am joining you all to discuss legislation to protect residents of multi-unit housing from the harmful health impacts of secondhand smoke. i am proud to join my -- to be joined by my colleagues,

supervisor walton and fur in sponsoring this legislation. today we are discussing the right of our residents to breathe clean air. many decades ago people did not have the right anywhere to breathe clean air, not restaurants, not bars, not sports events, not common areas and not on public transportation. maybe some people are old enough to remember these things. when science proved there was a link between secondhand smoke and health impacts, when people breathing the secondhand smoke, things changed. today we have laws prohibiting smoking in most of these situations. we can enjoy -- without having to breathe in smoke. we can participate in large crowd venues like concerts and sports events without worrying

about the harmful effects of secondhand smoke. i was alerted and reminded that san francisco has fallen behind many cities in enacting policies to protect our most vulnerable from secondhand smoke, a mother with an infant. she contacted my office asking for help because her infant who was subjected to secondhand smoke from her neighbors and -- health impact this would have on her infant. our reply to her at the time was it's the sad state for our residents, but that's the policy of the city, which is currently in san francisco if you live in multi-unit building you do not have the right to breathe clean

air, unlike many cities throughout california. i would like to thank the public health experts and advocates who worked with our office to ensure that the policy will be effective, including san francisco tobacco free coalition, researchers at the university of california san francisco, the heart and wellness association, bay area community resources, americans for non-smokers' rights, and the american cancer society. in january we held a hearing. that seems so long ago now, but it was in the middle of january, before the pandemic, at this committee on the health impacts of secondhand smoke. we heard from public health experts from secondhand smoke exposure was skyrocketing in recent years. we also heard residents from multi-unit housing were

particularly at risk from exposure. when my office was contacted by those suffering from secondhand smoke, including those with chronic health issues and families with small children, we looked into that, as i mentioned before. and here are the facts about smoking. smoking is the single most preventable cause of disease and death in the united states. it's responsible for more than 480,000 deaths per year. secondhand smoke alone is responsible for more than 41,000 deaths per year and causes cancer, lung disease and -- and heart functions. it also causes increased health risks to children, seniors and those with existing health issues. secondhand smoke can cause permanent damage to children's

growing lungs, pneumonia, ear infections, sudden infant death syndrome, and can make asthma attacks more frequent and more severe. unfortunately home is one of the most common places where we can be exposed to secondhand smoke. residents of multi-unit housing are more likely to be regularly expos exposed. our health code prohibits smoking in common areas, as mentioned before. this legislation would amend the health code to prohibit smoking inside owner-occupied and rented units of multi-unit housing complex complexes of three or more units. it would require that signage be posted in common areas and

residents are notified as a policy by the building owner or manager. the -- department of public health conducting a public information campaign to raise awareness of the policy and to share information about available smoking cessation resources to support residents addicted to nicotine. half of san franciscans live in multi-unit housing. residents of multi-unit housing are likely to be people of color and will more likely be low-income. exposure to secondhand smoke in the homes amplifies health inequities and disproportionately impacts our most vulnerable community members. by granting relief to residents living every day with secondhand smoke in their homes is more important than ever as we continue to battle covid-19 pandemic and prepare for a flu season.

we know that secondhand smoke exacerbates the impacts of many respiratory illnesses. during this time, we have asked san francisco to stay at home to slow the spread of covid-19 and asked children to go to school remotely, we know there are san franciscans who can't escape the smoke in their homes during the day and aren't able to breathe clean air. if i am a parent of a child who suffers from asthma or a person recovering from covid-19, right now i get no help at all if a neighbor is smoking every day right next door or downstairs. it's legal for everyone to smoke inside their own unit regardless of the serious and dangerous health consequences. we should not prioritize -- to smoke over the right to breathe smoke-free air. this is simply unacceptable. i also want to say that we know

there may be some concerns surrounding unintended impacts that a smoke-free housing policy can have on tenants addicted to nicotine, specifically there are concerns around how this policy could be misused to evict tenants. that is why this ordinance specifically states that violation of the policy is not grounds for eviction. over the past ten years, 63 cities and counties in california have adopted 100% smoke-free multi-unit housing policies. i'm hopeful that these policies will increasingly become the

norm. in san francisco we have -- against tobacco and secondhand smoke to protect the health of our communities. we can and should continue to protect our most vulnerable communities from this devastating health impacts of smoking. there are a few non-substantive amendments i would like to propose today. my office has shared he's amendments with all the members of the -- my office has shared the amendments with all the members of the committee. first, the health code currently prohibits smoking in enclosed common areas of buildings that have two or more units. this ordinance we introduced would change the law about smoking in all buildings with three or more units. this will clarify that smoking will continue to be prohibited in common areas of two-unit buildings. second, we would like to add

language that clarifies the intent of the legislation to prohibit smoking in all housing used to provide child care, including child care facilities that operate in single-home families or duplexes. third, we would like to include an exception that would allow for the use of medical marijuana in multi-unit housing. and finally we would like to include clarifying language to speak that not only is violation of any part of this ordinance not grounds for eviction but -- existing tenancy to prohibit smoking in a tenant's unit. so chair mandelman, i hope that

the committee can adopt these amendments later, but before you take action, i would like to bring up a few presenters. wayn't to thank the department of public health -- i want to thank the department of public health, marina speegel from the tobacco project and jennifer colliver from the environmental health branch for joining us today. i believe that they are here and are prepared to share a brief presentation with us. i hope they're here. i can't see them. >> i'm here. this is jen and marina is here too. she'll probably be coming on in a second, and she'll start the presentation. >> good morning, supervisors and everyone. let me see. we have prepared a presentation for you this morning. can you see the screen, the presentation on screen?

>> yes. >> fantastic. well, good morning, supervisor mandelman, walton, stefani and others. i am the acting community engagement lead for the tobacco free project and our program is part of a community health equity and promotion branch within the department of public health. first we wanted to thank you for your leadership in addressing the leading cause of preventable deaths through tobacco prevention policies and programs, including policies such as prohibition of unauthorized e-cigarettes, so sales and others in the past. your support continues to be a leader in implementing laws that protect communities, especially people of color, youth and low-income communities ft. thank you for the opportunity to

prevent to you about the outcomes based on secondhand smoke for san franciscans. before i begin, i wanted to emphasize that we consider that smoke is smoke, and when we talk about secondhand smoke exposure to smoke, we will be talking about both traditional tobaccos, secondhand smoke, so such as from cigarettes or cigar smoke, as well as secondhand aerosol exposure from e-cigarettes and cannabis smoke. first we wanted to share with you what proportion of san franciscans are smoking basing our use in cannabis. our most recent data is from 2018, so these data show the smoking rates among adults and young people has not changed much over the years. so approximately 12% of adults currently smoke in san francisco, and approximately six and a half percent of sfunh high

school students reported smoking, and that's despite the laws prohibiting sales of tobacco to anyone under 21. so those rates have not changed. on the other hand, more students than adults have ever tried an e-cigarette, and this rate has been increasing over the years for both groups. it's unclear how many adults currently use e-cigarettes. however, the portion of students who currently use -- reports using e-cigarettes doubled over the last couple of years, so from 2017 to 2018. lastly you'll see that about six out of ten adults have ever tried cannabis and almost tlae out of ten sfusd students have ever used cannabis. the good news about the majority of san franciscan adults and youth who do not smoke or use

e-cigarettes. this means we have been doing a great job in san francisco protecting and preventing adults and young people from using highly addictive product, especially traditional cigarettes. that said, we do still see some tobacco use disparities. so as you'll see in our data in the graph on the left, these data are a little bit older than the previous slide, and the overall tobacco use rate does appear lower. generally for this particular data we think it's because the time period is different and the sample size is different. the 2018 data that you saw previously comes from a more recent oversampling of the california health information survey data, so it's probably a little bit more accurate than these older data. so despite the fact that these data are a little older, i wanted to share this chart to

demonstrate the disparity in fwk use rates between the two socio-economic groups in our cities. so the data showed that the lower-income folks living at below 200% federal poverty level tend to smoke almost twice the rate than their more financially secure peers. low-income residents also have less access to health care and are more likely to suffer from conditions such as asthma that are worsened by secondhand smoke exposure. data does point to racial and ethnic disparities in tobacco exists as well. as you see in the graph on the right, black women are significantly more likely to smoke before or during preg pregnancy in the city of san francisco, and while the local data are not as easily available on specific tobacco use rates, we know that nationwide

african-americans and american indians smoke at significantly higher rates than their peers. so tobacco use is also much more prevalent in the lgtb community, especially the trans gender unit, and among those suffering from mental illness and have a history of substance use. currently we don't have recent population level data on secondhand smoke exposure specific to san francisco, but we do have the following state-wide data for adults and high school students. more than half of california adults reported being exposed to secondhand smoke tobacco smoke in the last two weeks, and this figure has not changed over the years. so california high school students, one in three reported being exposed to each type of secondhand smoke in the last 30 days. and that happens usually in the room or in the car.

notably there has been also an increase in recorded exposure to e-cigarette aerosol and cannabis smoke among adults, and it's likely that these state-wide trends are similar in san francisco. and secondhand smoke exposure also has documented disparities nationally and locally. centers for disease control study show that about 40% of children nationwide are exposed to secondhand smoke from cigarettes however that number is much higher at black and african american children at seven out of ten. children exposed to secondhand smoke are at an increased risk for sudden infant death syndrome, ear problems and more severe asthma symptoms. black and african american

children, filipino children are twice as likely to be diagnosed with asthma by middle school than their white peers. the home is the main place they are exposed to secondhand smoke. among the children admitted to the zuckerberg san francisco general hospital's pediatric and patient units in 2019, one in five were exposed to secondhand smoke in their homes. an additional 9% reported being exposed to secondhand cannabis smoke. again as we dive into the specific harms and types of secondhand smoke, i want to stress that there is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke. all three types of secondhand smoke harm the user and others through short-term and long-term exposure. the 50th anniversary surgeon

general's report on smoking and health released in 2014 stated that smoking is the single most preventable cause of disease and death and that scientists indicate there is no risk-free level of exposure. secondhand cigarette smoke contains hundreds of chemicals known to be toxic or carcinogenic including many different chemicals. secondhand cigarette smoke is also a known cause of disease, so not just a contributor to worsening symptoms but an actual cause of disease, including lung cancer, coronary disease, stroke in healthy non-smokers. breathing secondhand smoke for a short amount of time can have immediate effects on the cardiovascular system. concentrations of cancer-causing and toxic chemicals in secondhand smoke and nicotine

are the same in secondhand smoke as in the smoke inhaled by smokers themselves. exposure to the secondhand smoke is also correlated with more er visits and more hospital stays among adults and cost billions of dollars per year in health care in the u.s. nationwide. in 2010, the annual health care cost attributable to secondhand smoke exposure at home were up to $1.9 billion. so often people think that e-cigarette vape is harmless, but we want to emphasize that it isn't. it is not water vapour, as advertised when e-cigarettes first came on the markets. in most cases it is a solution which poses health risks similar to cigarette smoke. e-cigarette aerosol most commonly contains nicotine and nano-particles of benzene and lead and are more easily and

deeply breathed in due to their tiny, tiny size. studies have shown that non-smoerks exposed to e-cigarette aerosols absorb similar levels of nicotine to those who are exposed to cigarette smoke. breathing secondhand e-cigarette aerosol can result in actual development of asthma in children and is damaging to the lung tissue and the blood vessels. mostly we wanted to talk about the harms of secondhand smoke cannabis smoke. secondhand cannabis smoke contains more than 33 other identified toxins. similar to secondhand tobacco smoke, cannabis smoke contains chemical constituents that may have harmful cardiovascular effects and may lead to heart attack and stroke. children exposed to secondhand cannabis smoke in one study had detectible levels of thc in their blood streams which can

impair the developing brain and nervous system and impact iq and memory. while only limited studies exist on the effects of second habd cannabis smoke on children, a recent study suggests an association between secondhand cannabis smoke exposure and increased emergency room visits with the latest issues, diagnosis of an ear infection, asthma or eczema in children under 14. lastly i wanted to share with you the impacts of thirdhand smoke. thirdhand smoke refers to the leftover particles from tobacco smoke and e-cigarette air sol which cling to indoor surfaces long after smoking has stopped in the space and then can be resorbed by others entering the same space. thirdhand smoke is a potential health hazard. it contains carcinogenic

materials that -- over time presenting a hazard far after that smoker is gone. thirdhand smoke remains months after non-smokers have moved into units where smokers previously lived. it potentially poses the greatest dangers to infants and toddlers that crawl on rugs and furnishings and put things in their mouth that they shouldn't. non-smoking people who are exposed to thirdhand smoke have significantly higher nicotine and -- levels than those who have not been exposed to thirdhand smoke, and some research has shown that thirdhand smoke can damage human's cellular d.n.a. in multi-unit housing, we just wanted to share some of these

things that might be relevant to today. we know that people of color, young adults, low-income residents and smokers are more likely to live in multi-unit housing. in san francisco more than half of residents live in multi-unit housing with two or more units, 53%. a study has shown that san francisco residents who live in buildings with five or more units are three and a half times more likely to report -- and residents of districts three and six reported being exposed to drifting secondhand smoke at much higher levels than residents in other districts according to the healthy neighborhood survey conducted in 2013. we spend the majority of our time in our homes, and as i mentioned previously, approximately half of the san

francisco residents with multi-unit housing that has more than two units, so that includes condos, public housing and apartment buildings and duplexes. secondhand smoke from a neighbor can easily seep through windows, cracks through the hallways and walls into others' homes. thirdhand smoke is also a concern, and so it is important to emphasize that opening windows, air ventilation, air conditioning, fans, h vac systems, none of those current practices in the home can completely eliminate exposure to secondhand smoke and e-cigarette aerosol. with that, those are the data that we have to share with you today. i wanted to thank you for an opportunity to present to you, and i'm happy to answer any

questions. >> the chair: i don't see any questions on the roster. i mean, i guess -- so i will perhaps -- oh, there you are. >> i'm sorry, i was on mute. was that the only presentation? or was there another one? i wasn't sure. >> that's it for the tobacco free project. >> and i think supervisor walton has a question or a comment. >> okay. >> thank you, chair mandelman. i don't have a question. i guess i do. if that's the end of the presentations, i just wanted to make a comment. is that the end of the presentations? >> yes, it looks like it. >> thanks. i just wanted to thank president yee for bringing this ordinance forward. we know the dangers of

secondhand smoke as discussed not only in your comments, president yee, in the data, but also in the presentations, and i just wanted to thank you for bringing this forward. as you know, a lot of our concern in the beginning was about making sure that tenants would not be evicted and people would not use this as a grounds for eviction, and i just want to thank you for being thoughtful and making sure that we included language that specifically states that individuals can't be evicted because of this. but also stressing the importance of making sure that we do everything we can to keep people from having to inhale secondhand smoke because of what it does to folks in our communities and our residents, and so thank you for bringing this forward. i was happy to co-sponsor, and we're going to continue to do what we can to let people know that smoke does not just affect them, and we need to avoid secondhand smoke and come up with the measures and policies to do that. so thank you so much.

>> the chair: thank you, supervisor walton. i guess i do have -- if that's the end of the presentations, i also have -- well, i do have some questions. and i appreciate that the legislation provides that smoking -- that the violations of the ordinance can't be the basis for an eviction. and i just want to be clear on what the enforcement mechanism is. it looks like the department of public health is tasked with issuing notices of violation. so if someone is, in fact, smoking in their department, dph -- and there were complaints, the dph would issue a notice of violation. if the person did not cure that, then there would be administrative penalties i think of up to $1,000 a day?

>> hmm. >> that is correct, if you'd like me to answer. this is jen calowert with terminal health. that is how it is written. i think that it's -- there's still room to kind of figure out what that would look like. to try to determine if someone is actually in violation is probably the biggest question that we have to start thinking about, yeah. >> the chair: and the owner of the building, would the owner of the building be in violation if tenants were smoking in their units? >> i might ask -- it is my understanding that it doesn't read that way, but maybe, you know, following up with the other -- you know, supervisor yee and the city attorney, but

it's my understanding it doesn't read that way. there's a lot of notification requirements and, you know, posting requirements, but the enforcement section speaks to the person in violation, so that's kind of every piece of the law. >> the chair: okay. >> [indiscernible] this legislation trying to emphasize the education component of this rather than putting a lot of emphasis on enforcement. there is mechanism for enforcement but it is targeted towards the individual not so much the owner of the building. so again, you know, try to protect all the people here and

go as far as we can. we were pretty sensitive to lobbyist issues, but at some point we have to figure out whether or not what we present is going to be impactful or not, and to the point where if you don't do this, don't do that, it means it becomes pretty much back to what it was, and i think what i'm presenting today is really those compromises that were made but still feel like it can be very impactful. people know -- when i get another email from the mother of the infant, i can say, no, they are not supposed to smoke. sure, the landlord posted that this is against the law, the smoking in your unit, and that's more than three or more units. so that's a bit of the emphasis. >> the chair: i guess then my other set of questions relate to

cannabis, and i noticed the presentation did include information about the harmful effects of secondhand smoke from cannabis. i appreciate that the author has done an amendment to exempt out folks who have medical cannabis -- but i would say in the current environment, many people who are using cannabis for medical reason don't get the card because cannabis is now, in california at least, legal to consume in your own home. the concern i was about the legislation is that for folks who do not have a medical cannabis card, there are very few places outside your own home where you can consume cannabis.

it is not in that way -- it is not parallel to cigarettes in that way. cigarettes there are still places where smokers can go and smoke. that's not so much the case for cannabis smokers, and so i do have some concerns. i'm curious about the reasons for not having a blanket exemption for cannabis consumpti consumption. >> well, we said it -- you heard the presentation. it's not any less harmful than tobacco, and for us to just have a blanket, we are then worsening once again to others is that you're going to breathe cleaner air. it gets trumped on other things being a priority. i'm making the case that my

priority is to provide clean air for people to breathe in their own homes, and i'm not trying to -- what this does is try to solve for that issue. that means that there's going to be other issues, and this is going to be -- people will find creative ways, in my mind, to be able to smoke a cannabis. i know not everybody has a car to sit in, but there's different ways you can do this. we're trying to fix something here and basically it gets in the way a little bit of what you heard putting out is really a state level, and that has to be fixed. so for us to not try to say,

well, the overarching problem here because of state laws, i prefer to be more aggressive about this, and it feels okay for people -- again, you have people living in a unit where whether they are infants or seniors, people who have asthma or what, it's not a party for th them. we are just going to have to make a decision. so there's no clear answer or clean answer to that, but i guess i side on the health of san franciscans is more right than wrong. >> i just want to ask ms ms. callewaert a little more

about that presentation, because it did present cannabis cigarettes and nicotine cigarettes as being essentially parallel in their health impacts. and you know, i am not -- i'm not a -- i'm not urging people to use cannabis. i do not use cannabis myself, but i want to understand if that is, in fact, the position of the department of public health, that because -- because it's my -- my impression is and has been that nicotine and nicotine addiction have been -- i know generally recognized to be a serious health problem. is it the department's position that cannabis is every bit as much of a problem as nicotine?

>> thank you for the question, and i'll also let maryna chime in as well, who gave the presentation. i don't know if we know exactly the level of comparison, but as maryna stated -- >> the chair: we know nicotine and cigarettes kilotons and tons of people every year. >> yeah, and i think we can say nicotine and tobacco smoke and cannabis smoke have health impacts secondhand and thirdhand smoke. >> having impacts is -- but your presentation suggest that they're the same. the diet coke that i drink has health impacts. it's bad for you. i shouldn't do it. >> yeah, i don't have the answer of if it's impactly the same level of impact, and maryna might want to answer as well, but i don't have that data. >> i'm not sure i can say specifically that, you know,

share a specific answer to that question, but we can -- jennifer and i can pass your questions specifically to our health officer to provide, you know, an official dph response. >> the chair: i think that would be interesting. all right, that's the end of my questions. we -- i understand we do have public comment. president yee, did you want to say more before we go to public comment? >> no, let's go ahead and take public comment. >> the chair: okay. mr. clerk? >> thank you, mr. chair. operations is checking now to see if we have any callers in the queue. please let us know if we have any callers who are ready. for those who have already connected to our meeting by phone please press star followed by three if you wish to speak on this item. for those in the queue, please wait until you are prompted to begin. you will hear a prompt that states your line tab unmuted.

for those watching our meeting on cable 26 or sf tv gov.org, please call in following the instructions by dialing 1-415-655-0001. enter today's meeting id to connect to the call which is 146-225-1223. press the pound symbol twice and then press star followed by three to enter the queue to speak. mr. chair, did you want to go over your -- >> the chair: i will add that speakers will have two minutes. we ask that you state your first and last name clearly and speak directly into the phone. if you have prepared written -- a written statement, you are encouraged to send a copy to the committee clerk for inclusion in the official file, and in the interests of time, we do encourage speakers to avoid reputation of previous statements. >> thank you. could you connect us to the

first caller? >> good morning, supervisors. my name is bob gordon. i'm co-chair of the san francisco tobacco free coalition. supervisors, please listen to the science. owners of multi-unit housing who are detroit red wing business in our city have a responsibility to provide to us living spaces that are 100% free from toxic e-cigarette tobacco and marijuana smoke. as you heard from the health department, people continue to suffer needlessly here in the city, and i'll add think of the immigrant restaurant worker who comes home to his cramped apartment in the mission who needlessly suffers from one of his roommates lights up. or the grandchild who's been taught that it would be rude in her culture to ask grandpa not to smoke inside the family's apartment. some of us who live in san francisco are lucky enough to have clean air to breathe, but it shouldn't be a matter of luck. most who smoke don't want to harm the health of their

neighbors. most owners and tenants want clean air for themselves and their neighbors. we can work together and create smoke-free air for everyone. support is available by phone or by text message at 1-800-n 1-800-no-butts. it's available in different languages, people addicted to e-cigarettes and those who chew tobacco. i want to applaud mr. yee and my hope is that san franciscans can hold on to housing while holding on to health. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello. my name is patrick haguan. i'm here as a volunteer of the american cancer society's cancer action network, and i'm also a biologist who specializes in cancer research. i'm here to just add a little

personal comment to what we've all been speaking about. i'm happy to see the committee's excitement about this movement. what i would just like to add as someone who studies cancer and biology is that we really need to acknowledge the science behind this and how harmful secondhand smoke is to our communities and that everyone should have the right to breathe clean air. there's absolutely no safe level of secondhand smoke exposure, and smoking is the single-most preventable cause of disease and death in the u.s. and more than 41,000 people are killed as a result of secondhand smoke exposure. in a time like today, i think san francisco can set a precedent by understanding our commitment to science and underlining that by supporting this. additionally, i would just like to add that i am a -- i live in a multi-unit housing right now,

and although i try my best to meet my neighbors, it's honest that in san francisco with the sections of diverse population and many people living in these units, it's unlikely for a lot of us to meet our neighbors, and it's really unfortunate to think that one of my neighbors could be making every right health decision for their them and their family, and yet if someone else in the building isn't as cognizant of their risk and the families around us that they could be putting all of us at risk. thank you for hearing my comments. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good morning, thank you. my name's antoinette, a resident of district eight and a proud voting native of san francisco. thank you for taking this important step to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke in homes like mine. i reside in a multi-unit building currently and most of

my life with people of all ages in this building. i know first-hand how smoking by parents at home can impact the health of family members, especially innocent children, which can cause lung damage and health issues. i do not support the proposed exemption for medical marijuana. i encourage you to pass a comprehensive smoke-free policy that addresses all kinds of smoke and the health of our community needs it. thank you so much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hi, i'm a resident of the marina district and 29 weeks pregnant, living in multi-unit housing and in support of the ordinance. this is necessary to protect children, adolescents and seniors with existing health conditions. pregnant people exposed to secondhand smoke show greater risk of giving birth to low

birthrate babies. i do not support the proposed exemptions for medical marijuana that may be prescribed for patients, that smoke is dangerous for the building and contain many of the same problems for tobacco smoke. it's known to have alternatives available to patients. i ask you to carefully consider whether the preference for secular medicine should be prioritized over the rights of all over neighbors, including children and pregnant women, like myself. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> board of supervisors i'm speaking today in support of this ordinance. thanks so much for calling me. i live here in san francisco and work at an investment firm with an office here in the city where i cover the health care industry, and i'm on the associate board for the society here in the city. until six months ago i shared walls with a family with three

small children. i know first-hand all of the things that pass incidentally from their space to mine and vice versa, from water leaks to the sounds of piano practice, the smells of burnt cooking. i can't bear the idea that those kids would have had no choice to breathe in my secondhand smoke had i been a smoker. unfortunately many children in this scenario today in san francisco as discussed. i think back to the wildfires in our region as well. just about everyone who could took protections. it's clear to all of us that this smoke represented a threat to our health. why then would we be complicit with the free flow of cigarette smoke or cannabis smoke in our hoemz? i should add i'm reading from the cdc website, smoke cannabis has many of the same cancer-causing substances as smoked tobacco due to the risks it poses to lung health, experts strongly caution against smoking cannabis and tobacco products.

one final anecdote is about my grandmother who passed away in september from lung cancer. she was a smoker for years in the '60s and '70s, which almost certainly contributed to her death. she was ultimately a victim of the lack of public awareness and the lack of public action around smoking in her time. today, on the other hand, we are privileged with the chance to learn from history. we have the chance to take public action and we have the chance to save lives. everyone should have the right to breathe clean air. please accept this ordinance and make san francisco a leader in secondhand smoke policy. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good morning, board of supervisors. my name is kate clifinger. i'm a 12-year district are the and an ambassador for the american cancer society cancer advocacy network. two years ago i was diagnosed with oral cancer at age 33. the first question ever doctor asked me was the same, do you

smoke? i didn't. i had no known risk factors and i had, quote, did everything right, but i still got cancer. to save my life i had part of my tongue cut out. i was in so much pain and couldn't eat properly for months. i lost eight pounds in the first month alone.

>> i am if lucky one. my cancer was caught early. my odds in hitting the five year survival mark are really good. good everyone the shot at health to protect clean air. thank you for your time in public service. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: i am catherine and i live in district 8. i live in the 36 unit building. unfortunately, the people in the

apartment below me have four smokers. it is driving me crazy. i feel sick all of the time with headaches. they refuse to talk about it. the teenage daughters also smoke cannabis, including the teenage daughters. the people next door to me, we live on the third floor have a small infant. i tried to talk to them. i bought a $200 air filter to try to clear the air in my apartment. it helped. i can't keep my windows open. miual donnie is -- my balcony is closed. the marijuana. i am 80 years old. i don't need brain fog from marijuana. i pray to god that you have a strong policy as possible. i would like to thank supervisor yee for introducing this.

this is a miracle to me. there is a possible ban on all smoking in a multi-unit apartment including marijuana. i thank you so much. >> next speaker. >> caller: good morning, supervisors. i am bryan davis. i live in district five. i have asthma and lung disease. i have only left the apartment twice since mid-march. several years ago a smoker lived in the unit below us. no matter how many times we asked, he refused to go outside to smoke. my breathing suffered. unlike now at least i could leave the an matterment -- the apartment without fear of covid. the tenant on the other side of our bedroom wall started smoking

marijuana in her apartment every day. some nights i had a hard time breathing. i asked her her to smoke outsid. she didn't stop. we kept a record of every time she smoked. the landlord couldn't do anything. she moved out. thank goodness. there is no guarantee another smoker won't be move in. we need a law to stop people from smoking or vaping anything in the units. i understand some people need medical marijuana. my medical condition matters, too. if edibles aren't an option they can go to the curb. no one will allow them. please send this to the board with no exception for marijuana. >> thank you, next speaker. >> caller: ii am "ted," a

resident of district five. this is an issue i feel strongly about, as i have had asthma since childhood. i had strong reaction to smoke of any kind. i truly hope that you are able to pass this legislation without any exemptions. in the many years we lived in our apartment we were exposed to marijuana and smoke in the unit. it is used for ma medicinal pur. i take a daily medication which must be mixed to water as it would be unfair to mix the medication to the water supply for the building exposing everyone else to my meds, it is unfair to medicate in the way i am exposed and put my life and the lives of my family members at risk. i don't want to force anyone to

take my medication and i don't want to take anyone else's medication. please pass this with no exemptions to protect the health of all san franciscans in multi-unit housing. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: hello. i live in the sunset district. i recently retired as a professor of medicine from u.c.s.f. i would like to thank supervisor yee for introducing the ordinance it is the science as i would like to address the question supervisor mandelman raised about marijuana smoke. marijuana smoke is not that different from tobacco smoke. in terms of many of the adverse health effects they are not due to the thc, ingredient in

marijuana, just as they are not the nicotine in the tobacco. it is due to other things. just two days ago a new study was published or two new studies showing marijuana smoke concerns are more likely to have complications after a stroke or angieio plaster or open clocked arteries and don't do as well after a heart attack. i think that the -- i want to support all of the people who think there should be clean ordinance passed with no exceptions for inhaled marijuana. unlike tobacco, there are many widely used edible and other forms of cannabis to deliver to those who don't pollute the air. those can use those noninhaled

forms. i would strongly support removing that exception. my other suggestion in terms of enforcement is that it is unlikely the health department is going to catch someone actually smoking in an apartment. as you heard from the health department presentation, there is something called third hand smoke, which is the residue the tobacco and cannabis leave. >> thank you for sharing your comments. next caller, please. >> good morning. i am a member of the san francisco tobacco free coalition. the important first step to improving the public health in san francisco. all residents will be protected

from the second hand folks. it cannot be controlled. no level of exposure to tobacco smoke is safe. the only way to protect residentses is to eliminate smoking indoor areas. the city should not allow anything other than smoke free policies in multi-unit housing. they are necessary to protect the most vulnerable including and not limited to seniors, people of color, existing health conditions. second-hand smoke is dangerous to children and can cause permanent damage to the lungs. asthma is triggered by second-hand smoke. people of color and low income individuals are more likely to live in multi-unit housing which

makes the seconded hand smoke exposure an issue. there are people with disabilities especially vulnerable. this ordinance will promote equity among these groups ensuring that all residents are healthy. thank you. >> next speaker. >> caller: i am lisa. i moved into the bmr unit in a multi-unit building. i have experienced heavy cigarette and marijuana smoke since april 2019. it is 24/7 between the hours of 2:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. the tenant and guests are caught smoking numerous times. management was unable to evict the tenant. i am medically disabled the conditions are exacerbated by

smoke unfreeing lance. i -- fragrance. the building management i can only transfer to another bmr unit in the same building, which is unavailable. i have had to use two air purifiers, turn on kitchen and bathroom fans and wear a mask and leave windows open 24 seven. i have been been forced to leave the unit in the middle of the night. i could not sleep or breathe. smoke was from everywhere, not just kitchen and bathroom fans. i have been living out of boxes since december 2019. i have paid $15,000 not to live in the unit and have my longings smell like smoke. many tenants are in common units, corridors. management is unable to enforce the no smoke policy.

once i am able to move to another apartment i may even counter the same problem again. it is dangerous to have tenants and guests smoking during the pandemic. please pass this s so i and oths are not exposed to second-hand smoke and not put at risk in contracting the coronavirus. thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: good morning, board of supervisors. i am leslie martinez, youth leader and 18 and live in district 11. i want to share how my little cousin has been suffering. the smoke from the neighboring units made it boars. he -- made it worse. he was gasping for air. he lived with a single parent it

was difficult to afford inhalers. this issue is real. i have seen the effects and attacks myself. i believe this issue is definitely preventable. thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: googood morning. i am with the san francisco coalition. i am calling on behalf of my friend a low income asian-american transgender woman who lives in san francisco looking for housing in the city. she began the transition. i told her smoking is at risk. [ inaudible ] second-hand smoke delivers nicotine to increase cravings in

those who want to quit. i don't want her to reach for cigarettes. she deserves to housing to breathe clean air and live a healthy life. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: good morning. i am john, resident of district 5. chair of american heart association supports board president yee's proposed ordinance. in my career in surgery i have witnessed first hand the cost to society from wound infection and hospital readmission. it is associated with covid-19 and the need for intu base and death. we should reduce the impact on the pandemic. it can cause serious disease and premature death among nonsmokers. researchers documented in the

air through heating, ventilation and air-conditioning and connections between unit. there is no safe level exposure to second hand smoke. long-term exposure is associated with an up to 30% increase risk for heart disease in adult nonsmokers. the proposed ordinance is an important strategy to protect vulnerable populations. we encourage you to join the american heart association in supporting this vital health policy. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: good morning, supervisors. i am the manager of advocacy. we were wounde founded over a cy ago. this will help combat the fatal

danger posed by second-hand smoke in the home. homes should be a safe haven, sanctuary from what we pays outside of our front door. to many san franciscans there are homes that are a naming or source of second hand tobacco and marijuana smoke especially in the time of covid-19. at the start of this pandemic offices and businesses closed and we were home. you asked children to learn from home. the data and consequences of inaction and urge us all by any means necessary to get on board for the greater good of our neighbors. in california 63 other cities and counties have already implemented 100% smoke free housing policies. today we have the consequences

of inaction and urge you to find away by any means to get on board for the greater good of the residence. san francisco uplifts the most vulnerable among us. many of you are involved over the last year. i thank you for your leadership thus far. i hope you will continue to lead with a comprehensive expensive free evidence. thank you. >> next speaker. >> caller: hello. good morning. i am carol, co-chair of the

african-american control leadership counsel. we are leaders to get tobacco out of the communities. i want to say i strongly support san francisco joining our progressive cities and getting rid of multi-unit smoking and housing with no exception for cannabis. i don't live in san francisco. i grew up bayview-hunters point. my daughter lives in atlanta. i have had to endure cannabis smoke with a toddler there for years. it is awful. we need to do something about cannabis and i do recognize people who live in multi-unit housing using cannabis don't have that many options. the option is not popoison everybody else with your cannabis smoke. it is so strong that walking down the street you can get a contact high by walking by somebody using it. black babies have the highest

exposure rate to second-hand smoke and as ma. we want to provide services to people so we are not lowering the boom but dealing with stress and other health issues that we have and to be comprehensive and supportive. to have backup and legal laws where people cannot poison themselves and their neighbors. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker.. >> do we have next speaker? >> if you hear from the system that your line has been unmuted, it is your opportunity to begin

your public comment. we are waiting for the next speaker. >> caller: good afternoon. i am the vice chair of the san francisco tobacco free coalition. i would like to thank president yee, supervisor walton and other supervisors today. i would like to thank you for the wolf presentation and all of the callers with support. to some it seems as if smoke free housing aims to take away freedoms. i would assert the housing policy is perhaps the only way to about measures of restorative justice for the past tenant of the defunct geneva housing annex and potrero hill and the

multi-unit dwelling. there was no protection for tenants who understood then they were exposed to second and third hand smoke and the adverse impacts to their detriment. right now san francisco has an opportunity to speak to the voices of the unheard. to the tenants hebrew tested the smoking with -- the tenants who protested. san francisco has a unique opportunity to show it cares about the current tenants and their communities but also that it cares about restorative effort in speaking to multi-unit dwelling communities of the past who wanted protection but did not receive it. i am just another caller urging the board of supervisors to listen to our calls and to heed the advice that you hear today and approve an ordinance for smoke free multi-unit housing

without exception. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: good morning. i am ruth williams with nonspokekers right. we support the ordinance but do not support the proposed marijuana exception. that would expose residents to drifting smoke indoors. second-hand smoke from marijuana contained particulate matters to breathe in the lung. if it is from vaping or any smoke is a health risk to call lung irritation and as maattacks and health problems for people with respiratory conditions. it should include multi-unit housing and reduce exposure for residents in an partments and con-- apartnent apartments and .

over the years i have received calls from san francisco residents they are suffering from breathing the smoke and how few options they have to improve the situation. some residents tell us the neighbors fail to address it indoors. complaints have increased this year as people shelter at home. they need support of the city-wide law. we want all residents to have a healthy and stable living environment including right to breathe air free from second-hand smoke. it is time for the board of supervisors to take action to help residents have this important health protection. i want to emphasize this is not against people who smoke but not in smoking in ways to harm other people. thank you for your consideration. >> thank you. next speaker.

>> caller: greetings from north bay. pamela, granger, co-chair of tobacco free sonoma county and cancer action network volunteer in support of the smoke flee sme housing presented today without marijuana exemption. we in could bac in tobacco contn francisco who stood up to the tobacco bullies over the years when we could not. that being said, let us share what we learned about smoke free housing over the past 14 years because between sonoma and marin counties there are 22 policies passed which include second-hand smoke from cigarettes and cigars, vape products and

marijuana. science and citizens say smoke is smoke is smoke. as for the discussion of marijuana, the citizens comment the use of the smoke to provide relief from neighbors should not provide deadly health consequences to them. vapors are the alternative. covid 19 highlighted issues of racial and health equity and driven people indoors where air quality is more important than ever. new policy is flawless, laws have a significant effect on social norms. it is imperative it is not acceptable. that is not acceptable to smoke anything in multi unit housing. today santa rosa with 175,000 people holdings the record as the largest city in california with the smoke free multi-unit housing policy. we are happy to yield that title

to san francisco. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: good morning. i am with the bay area activism. i live in the east bay. i am here because i would like to comment on smoke free housing agenda item 2. i organized youth in the east bay to advocate for smoke free housing like what is discussed now. everyone should have the right to breathe clean air and live in a safe homing. if san francisco can pass this it will apply pressure to pass this. i work with youth health at risk because they are not protected from second hand smoke.

i can only imagine how many youth and families breathe the second-hand smoke. low income and children of color have more likely to have asthma. they suffer worst outcomes. african-american children are twice as likely to be hospitalized and four times likely to die as white children. i support the ordinance to protect the families from secondhand smoke. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: hello everyone. i am an at owner in the district. first, i want to thank supervisor yee for sponsoring this multi housing smoking policy and i want to share my

policy with second-hand smoke. i have been exposed to substantial second-hand smoke. i tried almost everything you can imagine. air filters, i fill my walls and cracks. i have consultants to in my home for smoke transition and spent more than $10,000 to solve the problem. nothing works. when the pandemic is over i am selling my apartment and moving to a single family house. this is the only way to guarantee my family and myself will not be exposed to second hand smoke. i i will not be exposed to cancer and lung disease. today i will share my story. i want you to understand that not many people in san francisco have the resourceses to do this. i strongly oppose cannabis

because it is unfair to people to take the risk of harm. [ inaudible ] i want to comment about diet coke. this addiction. secondhand smoke is involuntary. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: good morning, supervisors. i am with the american heart association. we support protecting the residents in multi unit housing from all kinds of smoke. we support the public information campaign about second-hand smoke exposure in housing. we hope that increases the number of smokers connected to evidence based services.

there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke. it has immediate and long-term effects on nonanother -- nonsmokers. it is dangerous to others in the building and contains the same harms as tobacco smoke. we encourage you to pass the comprehensive policy to all kinds of smoke. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: hi. i am a member of the san francisco tobacco free coaliti coalition. marijuana doesn't have to be smoke. it can eaten in other ways. it is possible to include the protections. to allow people who use it for medical reasons. smoke free spaces in multi-unit

houses is necessary to protect seniors and children and people with existing health conditions. children of color are more likely to have asthma. i have been living in multi-unit housing for 20 years. it is disproportionately impacting communities like mine. i am five months pregnant. i am excited to have a pregnant with the kicks and all. it worries me to be exposed to second-hand smoke and greater risk for low weight babies. there are more things to worry about. breathing deadly smoke in the home doesn't have to be one of them. thank you board of supervisors and community for the leadership and time. >> thank you. next speaker.

>> caller: hello. i am mya. i am a general internist and assistant professor in the department of medicine and i live in district 7. i offer support for the smoke free ordinance. not only will this help people with second-hand smoke exposure but it may help people quit smoking. our work has shown that smoke free policies has the potential to motivate people to quit smoking completely. we have a real opportunity with this policy to reduce tobacco related disparities among the most vulnerable in the communities by reducing exposure and helping people quit smoking

while safeguarding housing for the most vulnerable. thank you so much for putting this forward. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: good morning. i am chris show man. i want to speak to the cannabis issue. i appreciate the public health concerns and i know the public health issues are of utmost importance. i think it needs acknowledged and supervisor mandelman mentioned it appropriately. this will essentially ban cannabis smoking for anybody who lives in the multi-unit building. it is not allowed outdoors. it essentially offers no option. i understand the issues with the medical marijuana exception, but i want to speak to the disabilities.

they cannot go outside. my wife has a disability, multiple disabilities arthritis, she cannot go outside. she uses marijuana medically for relief. she does not prefer to use alternatives to smoking or vaping because she does not react well to edibles. she needs to smoke or vape. without even considering the exemption which i appreciate that is proposed it will add versely impact her medically and her relief from her disabilities. thank you for your consideration. he appreciate the overall ordinance and everything that everyone is doing. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> caller: hello.

i am a resident of district 2. thank you guys for taking the step to reduce exposure to second-hand smoke in homes like mine. i live in a multi-unit complex and am the mother of twin driveways 10 months old -- twin boys crawling everywhere. i support the smoke free ordinance in san francisco. it is important to protect vulnerable populations like children. some dangerous second hand smoke exposure. i do not support the exception for medical marijuana. pass a policy for all kids to live with clean air. thank you for hearing my comments. >> thank you. next speaker. >> that completes the queue. >> public comment is closed on this item.

president yee, did you want to make final remarks? >> thank you, chair mandleman and supervisors walton and stefani for allowing me to present this ordinance to you. i want to also thank ms. siegel for her presentation of the facts to remind us why we are doing this. i want to thank the public for their comments. as you can see, there is going to be some that think this is not going far enough. there are some that think that it is going too far. i would be comfortable where we are at today with the amendments. and that in the future nothing is forever. maybe in the future other

supervisors will pick up this issue again and see if it can be improved. passing this today to the full board is a big step for us, and for us to address the certain percentage of the second-hand smoke you are talking about today. as i was mentioning before, it is about priorities. what do we feel are more important? the rights of people to breathe clean safe air in their own homes above those to smoke in homes? hopefully, my colleagues on the committee will agree that breathing clean air is very important and should be the priority. considering what a health risk that people have whether they have disabilities.

i have spoke about the amendments that i would like the committee to pass, and, hopefully, i have the support of the whole committee to pass this out of committee with positive recommendation to the full board. thank you very much. >> thank you, president yee. so i think this is an important piece of legislation, and i recognize the tremendous amount of work that president yee and his office have put into it. i do -- it has moved quite quickly, and i understand that president yee is interested in having us act on this before it leaves the board. i want to do everything i can to help make that happen. if that were not the case, i

would probably move to continue this item for a week or until our next meeting to sort of get more feedback and input on this cannabis issue. i think there is a real point here, which is that cigarettes and cannabis and nicotine are in a different position. people cannot legally go outside their home and smoke or vape cannabis. that is not true of cigarettes. they are limited where they can go but there are placing place o smoke marijuana. maybe medical cannabis is the right way to deal with this. it is the one piece of the

legislation i have a little bit of concern about. what i would propose, if my colleagues are willing, we accept the amendment, forward to the full board without recommendation and give those who may have concerns about the cannabis issues a little time to try to think about that between now and when this comes before the full board. supervisor walton. >> i was going to propose to accept the proposed amendment from president yee for the legislation first. >> i will take that as a motion. we will vote on it after vice chair stefani speaks. >> thank you, chair mandleman, and thank you president yee for the legislation. as you know when you spoke to me

about it, i let you know about the concerns from residents in my district. a lot of elderly residents about the concern. i want to thank those in public comment in district two who called in. i hear you loud and clear. i am very supportive of this legislation. thank you, president yee. >> so we have a motion to accept the amendment. mr. clerk. do you want to call the roll. >> the motion offered by member walton to accept all of the amendments offered by president yee. >> vice chair stefani. >> aye. >> member walton. >> aye. >> chair mandleman. >> aye. >> there are three ayes. >> the motion passes. the amendments are adopted. i will move that we forward this to the full board without recommendation. >> on the motions of the ordinance as amended be sent to

the board without recommendation to neighborhood services vice chair stephanie. >> aye. >> member walton. >> aye. >> chair mandleman. >> aye. >> mr. chair, there are three ayes. >> great. the motion passes. congratulations, president yee. >> thank you very much for your time. i am looking forward to having your support at the full board when we vote on this. thank you. >> mr. clerk. do we have any more items today? >> there is no further business on today's agenda. >> then we are adjourned. thank you everyone.

>> good afternoon, and welcome to the land use and transportation committee of the san francisco supervisors board today, on monday, november 16, 2020. i am the chair of the committee, aaron espeskin and joined by vice-chair, supervisor safai and the committee member, dean preston. miss major, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: due to the covid-19 health emergency and to protect the board members and the city employees and the public, the board of supervisors legislative chamber and committee room are closed. however, the members will be