advantage of criticizing san francisco and the things they think we are not doing well. it is throwing us under the bus to get the convention business we are losing. we ask for your support and help us to be competitive as we emerge from this. thank you very much. >> next caller, please. >> good morning. i pam john sanderson, john anderson of jw marriott. tourism has adapted to challenges of the city. along with my colleagues there are three main pillars that holed us up in san francisco. first, the people who work in the buildings and welcome the visitors to san francisco. this population are dedicated professionals.

on the faces seen and unseen they guarantee a clean and safe stay. sf travel has been wildly successful in recovering from past opportunities like the recent renovation of musc oni. $2.5 million to provide rental discounts is needed to come pete with other conventions. they are pulling out all the stops. last is the center. without a highly functioning center supported by the findings of the grand jury the other two struggle to recover and leave many out of work. yes, travel will return to san francisco. how quickly tax revenues return depends on the support and recommendations in this report. thank you to your dedication to

clean and safe streets for travelers and associates. i am looking forward to the impacts on resent wins. the street response team and prop b which we supported. thank you for your work. we appreciate it and appreciate your time. >> next caller, please. >> thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. i am catherine, executive director of the district. we support the recommendations in the report. today i would like to speak about the importance of the musc oni center. it is located in the middle. it is a significant contributor to the health of the

neighborhood. the importance is clearer during the pandemic. most restaurants and hotels rely on visitors and those at the convention at san francisco. to explain our role in making this the best neighborhood it can be. it is supplemental to the city. we have a cleaning removal of litter and steam cleaning the sidewalks. we have neighborhood ambassadors to help the street population connect to the services. we partner with the bike patrol officer for quality of life issues in the neighborhood. all of these services are provided 7 days each we're 265 days each year. san francisco travel has specifics on each convention to address services.

we analyze the walking routes from the hotel to the convention center and our team is as invisible as possible. we are committed to see if we can make adjustorment bees to improve efforts around musc oni center. we need help from the city to ensure the visitors have the best experience possible. we look forward to working together to tackle these important tasks. thank you for your time. >> thank you for sharing your comments. next caller, please. >> good morning. thank you for giving us your time. i am stacy judd. i am co-owner of the restaurant. [indiscernable] our business has served the

downtown market and business travelers who have attended events at the center and surrounding hotels. our current business is in hibernation. we are keeping a watchful eye on the neighborhood. we have concerns for safety for employees and future customers when we re-open due to increased crime anden campment activities. one of the findings included safety concerns from conventioners and planners. the time is now to maintain health and safety of streets by increasing foot and bike beats. the growing ofen campments and crime will erode this formerly vibrant part of the city and travel will return when it is safe to travel and gather. we are distressed we will be unable to reopen our business. the neighborhood will no longer

be desirable or safe. we urge you to maintain a higher police presence now to ensure the safety of our streets. we are also troubled by the increase in petty crime. the lack every percussion for the crimes by individuals that do not live here and will return to commit the same crimes. what are we doing to mitigate this behavior? we urge you to support the residents we about and the investment we made to the neighborhood and city by increasing police presence and implementing stronger actions to prevent petty crime offenses. this needs to start now to ensure our city is a desirable destination to attract tourism again. thank you for your time. >> thank you. next caller, please.

>> good morning. thanks for the opportunity to speak with you this morning. i am the president. [indiscernable] we are not for pro visit with 1300 business members in san francisco and the bay area. today we celebrated our 110th annual meeting. san francisco is a destination for business and leisure travel and the convention center is for group business. we know we can't take this for granted. we have had many groups leave san francisco in recent years. i thank the grand jury for the report and work. they will choose other cities if we don't change the way we do things. we need to offset rental rates or reduce recommendation rates to remain competitive and provide extra safety and security around the center. this is never more important as

we recover from the covid-19 pandemic which decimated the tourism injury. a modest investment into reducing the rates in the city has a massive economic impact. we have a nonprofit association that met here for a number of years. they may not come back if we don't give a blake on the rent as other cities are doing. the rent is 6 $72,000. to support the 11,000 jobs, total attendees 30,000. generate 64,000 hotel room nights. total economic impact is $66 million to san francisco. total local taxes to the city $3.1 million. for an investment of 6 $72,000 the city would get $3.1 million in taxes back. we can't afford to lose this

conference or many like it. it is a simple investment. you don't pay until you get the guarantee of the return. thank you and we look forward to working for you. >> next caller, please. >> good morning. i am kevin care roll, president of hotel council of san francisco. non-profit trade association representing hotel industry. the maswe support as an industr. the center is the lifeblood of bringing in business that will ultimately help our hotels and then help everyone in san francisco. when musc oni is successful, san francisco is successful. the recommendations before you

today are important. by helping provide discount and be more competitive with other cities in the nation will help us as an industry. safety concerns. employees and visitors and those attending do not feel safe. that is something this report really recognizes. it is critical to find a way in the city to address this situation. iit is real. we hear it every day. it will be critical to move forward. going into covid we were already losing conventions due to what is happening in the streets. now it is hard to recover. we need the support of everyone. we thank you, supervisor peskin, for your work in establishing the tid. that will be critical to bring back people to the city of san francisco. i urge you to support the

recommendations and work to support our number one industry and keep musc oni as rerobust as it can be because it will benefit every person in san francisco. thank you. >> next caller, please. >> good morning. thanks for the opportunity to impress my concerns today. i am. [indiscernable] from washington, d.c. i support san francisco be travel request for the funding to offset rental at the center. it is very critical for nonprofit organizations such as the society because they will be prohibited for all conventions to return to san francisco. without the rental offset, the

society will be full to choose other cities that are offering incentives and free rent at their convention centers. our meeting attendees have shared with me the need for the street to be cleaner and safer. they did not feel safe walking from the hotel to the convention center with aggressive homeless pan handlers. san francisco police presence is very important. thank you. >> next caller, please. >> good morning. i am the general manager of the clancy hotel. i am the current chair of board of directors of the hotel

council and sf travel and treasure of the east community benefit district. i thank you for the opportunity to speak and special thanks to chair mar and peskin and member haney. i give my full support of the findings in the report before you. they illustrate the top concern of our clients. it is vital the recommendations in the report are implemented immediately to laid in the economic recovery of the city. my hotel is currently open, i have only about 30 employees working one or two days each week. i have 120 employees not working at all. these recommendations are not only critical to bring back my team but to bring back conventions to san francisco. we are three blocks from the center. our community desperately needs the tax revenue from the conventions. i want to talk about the recommendations and concerns that i heard earlier. first, it is critical that we

support the current assessments with additional allocations. as far as we can show you a clear ry. not one dollar will be given unless we can do so. our competitive cities are giving away free represent. we are losing business. we need more police presence. that has got to happen. i heard per ception ception is reality. i say that every day. we have to change be this reality. i know that you talked about increasing the tid to cover these funds needed. something that i just want to say we would love to have you at the hotel council to talk to the board. there are pros and cons in saying these funds will come from increase in tid. make no mistake. my colleagues are working with city leaders to have the safety

resources. >> thank you for sharing your comments. reminder if you address the government audit and oversight committee address to the panel as a whole, not to any individual members of the panel or other speakers on the call. next caller, please. >> i am a journeyman and committee member with the stagehandses union. thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today, chairperson marand members peskin and haney. i support the findings and representations made in the report before you. these are very important to be able to make mosconi bookable when we get back to a normal

situation. when you walk down town today you can see what it is like to go down there when there is nothing going on. obviously, if there are conventions in town,. [indiscernable] the people that are working are going out to eat and spending money as well. it is very important that mosconi operates because it affects other cultures around it. it is important that we -- thatmuthatmusc oni gets help. indeed offering free rent or very low price rent. one of the things that we say in entertainment is that safety is first. that is what we need first.

that is how we need to approach conventions as well. that is why we need to make sure policence and doing whatever we do to think out of the box to make sure people feel safe and are actually safe. reminder that for san francisco the business meetings -- >> thank you for sharing your comments. next caller, please. >> thank you, speakers, i am on the report that was just presented. today i would like to speak as a long-time resident of san

francisco. it is imperative to speak on musc oni. i don't know if you have been down there lately. same problem. unlike reading it or hearing about the problem. it is disgusting. the residents deserve better. it needs to be cleaned up and maintained. why not implement a public works crew. that would be so easy. second we have to find money to support a small police presence down there. [indiscernable] all of that other stuff down there. it is simple. the city deserves better.

thank you very much. >> next caller, please. >> thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today. as well as for the work of the grand jury. i am from the san francisco chamber of commerce and we support the findings and recommendation in the report. these express important concerns of the travel and tourism industry. a pillar of our economy and related visitors and stakeholders of the small businesses which rely on conventions and visitors. these recommendations should be implemented immediately to support economic recovery of the city specifically the recommendations to supplement the currentmus coney assessments with additional general fund allocations to provide the rental discounts, addition of

more police staffing related to expected attendees during busy attention hours, renewal of the tourism district and task for f. they have been impacted by the covid-19 pandemic. the activity is a driver to employment and economic activity. there is an urgent need to recover and for businesses who rely on tourism to bring employees back as soon as it is safe to do so. implementation will help san francisco keep existing convention business and attract new business in a competitive market during an important rebuilding time and provide for clean, safe and welcoming city to all. thank you for your consideration and your time. >> next caller, please.

>> good morning. i am with local 16. i have been working at mosconi. i have seen the explosion. my car has. [indiscernable] the homeless situation is a disaster. it is a loss of revenue. for the safety of those walking by. i as a journey person for local 16 have gotten back to my car. i ducked out of the way. my point is that over the last few years international attendees described the situation as quite simply shocking to see the amount of homelessness and the lack of

ability to handle it. the idea to add three police officers to 10,000 would be a right direction to help secure the safety of those walking in and around mosconi for not only attendees but fellow co-workers. san francisco is a defund the police by day and call police by night. short of real situation society will go back to simply funding police. this is what we have to do at this moment. let the economic impact know 84% of the conventions are done within 250 miles of the actual. for example. lancaster, pennsylvania opened up their convention center in 2009. 40 miles from harrisburg. they have seen almost $112 million to a small city of 60,000 people paying money for

conventions. san francisco on the other hand has almost 900,000 people and we also rely on 21.5% of tourism is based on conventions. the difference between pennsylvania and san francisco is location. >> your time is concluded. next caller, please. >> good morning. i am an executive board member of local 16, resident of san francisco and parent of two children in public schools and partner of a person providing services to our most needed communities in san francisco. i can tell you from my own experience that the recommendations that have been made by the grand jury in this matter are of vital importance.

as ever every other speaker sta. we have to engage in actions that are constructive. i am not interested invillefying a person or discompassionate to mental health crisis. the simple facts are if we do not make changes in the way we are addressing policies and addressing specific issues we are going to continue to lose convention business. prior to covid-19, we already had a situation in which some of our largest shows left to go to nearby venues outside of the city and county of san francisco because of the three year construction project on mosconi. many of those are not coming back. not because of conditions of the street. we need to attract business. joe spoke towards the economic model and i really want to point

out that our progressive values in the city and county of san francisco where we represent the best qualities of human nature and government in america need tax revenue to pay for the programs that can help been fit those people who are in greatest crisis in this city and may be the people that caused some of the problems we heard discussed. in order to fund these things, we need business. much as we saw in the 1990s with run away film production we see run away convention production. >> thank you. next caller, please. >> thank you for hearing this item. i am the executive director of the golden gate restaurant association.

i am calling on behalf of the struggling restaurant industry in the city. we hope you support the recommendations in this report which we find have been thoroughly considered. needed to sustain our high performing musc oni convention center. success is linked to tourism spending in san francisco. the findings in the report are critical not only to the success of the area around musc oni but the restaurants that are sought out. the dollars result in jobs to the restaurant community. this is especialliness during this very difficult time as the pandemic and recovery next year. we urge you to promote return to san francisco tourism and ensure we are competitive with other

destinations and provide a clean and safe city for everybody. thank you. >> next caller, please. >> thank you for taking this comment. i would like to ask a bigger question which is post-pandemic which we don't know when convention business will be in full swing. we have no idea if it ever will be in full swing. is this a visionary force of investment income the way it has been? perhaps it is a pause moment in this pen dammic to reimagine tourism to support all of the folks representing thousands who comment on this who work but

transforming the center to be like the model of a convention bringing people together in a good safe way connected to the earth to honor the people that live there, support the art, in a city that is at the cutting edge of what it is to transform community safety and reimagine community safety. police surrounding a few blockings is not good mixing with the community living there and petty theft. go to the root causes of poverty and petty theft. look at petty theft. take care of the homeless population there and create a vibrant. i am seeing live music and festival safe. don't go to the same old pattern. thank you so much.

>> do we have further callers? >> the that completes the queue. >> thank you so much, operations. public comment is now closed. i do want to thank all of those who spoke during public comment. the many leaders of our business associations, hospitality industry and labor organizations and also i want to express my thanks to peter mills and the civil grand jury for your work on this very important report that has sparked this discussion about how to continue to sustain mosconi center in the city. i also want be to thank the department for their responses. the mayor's office, city

administrator, sfpd. i really concur and appreciate with the responses from our departments which are impartial disagreement with a number of the findings. then in terms of the recommendations, the response is that they will not be implemented for a number of very important reasons. i think that doesn't -- i want to highlight that we are in agreement with the overall focus of this civil grand jury report on the central importance of mosconi center and the conventions for the economic health of the city and i think we are all very committed to ensuring that does play a

essential role as we move towards recovery in the next year. thanks again for everyone. thanks to supervisor peskin for taking the lead on the board's response to the findings and recommendations. supervisor haney. >> thank you, chair mar. i want to thank all of the workers and business owners, residents who called in. i definitely hear the feelings of how important it is that we support the return and the resurgence and success o of the center and how important it is to the revenue and well-being. i represent the center as well and i am down in the area all of

the time. i definitely feel and see and hear how devastating this period has been for the people who rely on the economic activity connected to the center. i wanted to ask a question maybe of the city departments who are here because even though the recommendations didn't exactly speak directly to this, a lot of the comments and general sentiment as it related to the concerns about homelessness and mental illness and street cleanliness, i think there was a consistent theme around those issues. i know there is a public safety recommendation, but how as a city are we ensuring and the departments ensuring the overall

well-being of the area? a lot of the things that were brought up related to people suffering from mental illness or drug addiction? i do think that area often lacks an adequate amount of street outreach and support, whether that is street cleaning or helping people who are in meed who are left abandoned in this part of the city and attendees of conferences then see that and obviously it is very concerning. it affects anyone who is in the area. can somebody speak to those concerns, cleanliness, mental illness, all of the things that homeless. it came up again and again as to how the city's departments ensure the well-being and safety of people in the area, whether they are without homes or visiting beyond the police

aspect of it? >> thank you for your comment. i can comment on the conditions out here. they are closely monitors 24/7. going back to one of the recommendations with regard to the collaboration our department has with the number of different organizations supporting the community in this sensitiveantic area. we do have our security team at mosconi on constant checks. we also have reaching out again to the police department and our local beat officers in the southern station command staff. we also work closely with the benefit district and they also know again as cathy mentioned

they know our schedule when our attendees are in the neighborhood. they do staff up their officers and their community ambassadors to navigate the situation. of course, we have a direct line of communication with the public health and hsh and all of the different important divisions so that when there are situations that come up that we need support with we can quickly reach out to them for meediate response. that is kind of in a nutshell how we manage the perimeter of the building during normal times. >> it is sort of general connected necessary to the broader city responses on these issues but not really anything specifically dedicated for the

area as far as community ambassadors or outreach or hot team or anything like that? >> that's correct. nothing specific. but those are all organizations that we reach out to whenever necessary. >> one thing i will flag. we do have the new street crisis outreach teams that are deployed through mental health sf and a number of other changes and new level of commitments related to mental health sf which we talked about in the last item and new department of sanitation. all of this i hope can also bring to barosome of the concerns that were raised to ensure that the very real aspects of people who have been left without services or treatment and are on the streets

with unmet needs can be better addressed. as a last thing i definitely will work with the hotel council and sf travel and local 16 and everyone to help to move forward the concerns addressed and brought up even as some of the recommendations specifically may not move forward today. thanks. >> supervisor peskin. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i really appreciate the way you laid out your comments at the get-go and would like to associate myself with those comments. i want to marry together a few things. the first grand jury report today relating to the unprecedented investment that the city by and through the mayor and that the instigation of supervisors haney and ronen

and embraced by the full board during this pandemic. with thanks to the voters we are investing unprecedented resources in addressing the behavioral health crisis that we have on our streets. i also want to bring into this conversation something that happened earlier this week at the board of supervisors related to hopefully a turning of the page with the police officers association. that vote on the poa contract also was accompanied by a side letter as to an acknowledgment that i think we all on the board embracedded this matter of public policy that we need to diversify our notion of what first responders are.

mental health professionals should be coming to people in crisis when it is not a dangerous situation rather than law enforcement officers. the poa acknowledges that. our public health officials acknowledge that. we are concentrating on all of these things. yes, the convex and visitors function in san francisco is profoundly economically important. indeedmus connie center is a loss leader. we need to spend money to make money. that remains true. we also have some balancing as the m.t.a. is getting ready to layoff hundreds of bus drivers. we are in one of the biggest fiscal municipal crisis in 100

years. we have got to be thoughtful and careful about that. to that end to cut to the chase, i would like to on page 4 of the resolution that is before us agree with findings 1 through 5 in whole. as i said earlier and consistent with the mayor's response. disagree partially with finding 6 for the following reasons. the musc oni center is one of the highest in demand centers among the first tier venues for conventions and visitors despite costs. those at the convention consider a variety of factors in hosting event in the city. with regard to finding 7 i suggest we partially disagree for similar reasons.

namely, that the center is one of the highest in demand among the first tier venues before the pandemic because those at the convention consider a variety of factors to host the events in the city. as to finding 8, i would like to disagree in part with similar language. that is that it is one of the highest destinations among the first tier venues for convention and visitors before the pandemic despite cleanliness. they consider a variety of factors. number 9, disagree in part for the following reason. there are many contributing factors to the decisions. san francisco should focus on

competitive advantages by elevating overall value of conventions at mosconi. with regard to the four recommendations concurring with the mayor, recommendation 1. i would suggest colleagues and i spoke to this earlier will not be implemented because the renewal of tid is subject to democratic process. input from holts and tourism leaders and the city and council of san francisco. that is the language i suggest. this is as a matter of state law as well as the local law implementing lawing i passedded in 2003. this actually requires a vote of the pay ors and as we saw last week at the board of supervisors where there was a majority protest at the fisherman's wharf community benefit district, we

were not in position to approve because it did not receive 50% of the vote. we can't renew it or implement that recommendation. i stand by my earlier comment i have every intention of working with the tid and the team and i ask the local 16 to ensure this tid is renewed. i said that as the original author of the tid. as to recommendation number 2. that i suggest will not be implemented and consistent with the mayor's response because the city is unable to commit additional general fund given the city's future fiscal uncertainty due to the covid 19 public health emergency. having said that as i said earlier you have got to spend money to make money. that should be on the table when we have our upcoming budget discussions for the fiscal year

that ends on june 30th and i will be on that board and supervisor haney and marwill be on the board and it will be part of the budget deliberations but not implemented per the grand jury recommendation. as to recommendation 3. that would not be implemented because the city is unable to commit resources to assign at least three uniform beat patrol officers per 10,000 attendees. given the covid-19 public health emergency. with regard to recommendation number four that it not be implemented. the city ha has an active relationship with organizations that oversee security and street management. those would be my motions on pages 4 and 5, mr. chairman.

>> thank you. i am in agreement with your proposed board responses to the findings and recommendations. supervisor haney, do you have anything? >> no, i think i have said my piece around it. i agree with supervisor peskin, the responsibility around public safety, responsibility around the renewal, figuring out a better way to ensure collaboration anchored nation amongst departments is needed. a real action plan from the city and the departments, around the needs of mosconi moving forward is critical. i am committed to working with all of the stakeholders, including everyone who called in

and the departments and supervisor peskin as well can make sure we are moving forward in this critical city institution. i will be supporting what supervisor peskin just put forward and the next steps that we have outlined here. >> i would move that we adopt the amendments to item 4 as presented by supervisor peskin. then we also recommend item 4 as amended to the full board and that we file item 3, the hearing on this. mr. clerk. please call roll. >> on the motions that the responding resolution be amended. the motion offered by chair mar. >> supervisor peskin. >> aye.

>> member haney. >> aye. >> chair mar. >> aye. >> mr. chair, there are three ayes to the amendment. >> the motion offered by chair mar the amended resolution be recommended as amended. vice chair peskin. >> aye. >> member haney. >> aye. >> chair mar. >> aye. >> mr. chair, there are three ayes again. on the motion offered by chair mar that the hearing matter be heard and filed. vice chair peskin. >> aye. >> member haney. >> aye. >> chair mar. >> aye. >> three ayes. >> can you please call items 5 and 6. >> 5 is a hearing on the civil grand jury report a recycling

reality check what happens to thinks we put in our blue recycling bins. >> 6 is the findings and recommendations contained in that civil grand jury report and urging the juror to accept the findings and recommendations through the department heads of annual budget. members public to comment on this hearing matter call the public comment number now. that number is 415-655-0001. enter the meeting id (146)215-7375. pound twice then star followed by 3 to answer the queue to speak. it will indicate you have raised your hand. when you are unmuted you may comment. >> thank you, mr. clerk. for the third and final hearing and consideration of report by

the important work of the civil grand jury. i will welcome the civil grand jury. the floor is yours. >> thank you, chair and committee members. mr. jonathan gostad was the chair of the report. he will proceed with the presentation. >> thank you. i am long time san francisco resident. born at the keysser hospital on geary boulevard. phyllis and i tried to take on something a little more constrained and less contentious than what we have heard this morning. simply something we talked about which was about recycling. what happens to the stuff in the blue opinions? we started to talk to people and got responses from citizens.

there is a lack of clarity. >> skepticism it is going somewhere. china is not taking it, it is dumped. with the concerns about plastics in the environment. we thought it would be interesting to investigate this targeted question. where is the stuff going? how do you find out where the stuff goes? to that end we got in touch with sf environment, which quickly took us to recology down at pier 96. they are the arms and legs that take care of the material. i would like to thank sf environment and recology. they were helpful in answering the questions and letting us visit the facility. they deserve kudos for their

participation. in summary, what we found is that the city is doing a heck of a good job to resigningcle the material. it is around 82%. we get held up as the best city in the country for recycling. that is really the good news. it is important to point out one of the things you learn when you visit the facility. when you go to pier 96 and see hundreds of tons of this stuff coming in every day, you realize doing anything at scale is extremely difficult. you can deal with 50 pounds. if you deal with 500 tons of it is a different story. beal realistic about it. the partnership has done a good job of finding the balance and

where it is going. that is a positive part. one think we found was the problem of communications. what we found was that both organizations and actually other organizations do a good job trying to communicate what you as a citizen are to do with your material. obviously there are websites and a nice app. you can type in pizza box and it tells you the green one. there was a lot of material where the material was being sent. what we found was that that information is not there. we felt and that is in the recommendations it would be useful to provide that. if people know it is recycled properly, they are more likely to participate in the process. when you hear an ad to donate to a charity.

99.99% of the money is going to whatever the target is to get the money. they want you to buy into the area it is being used appropriately. that would help. communication we have seen with covid. communication is extremely important. consistent communication is a problem. in recycling it is inconsistent communication. it is because every different municipality has a different approach. people have compared information. what they are doing in denver has nothing t to do with what ty are doing in san francisco. you want to say here is what we are doing. our recommendations were quite limited in scope, which was just

start to communicate on a regular basis where the stuff is going. keep that up-to-date. hopefully the word will get out and improve further not just rates every cycling but also the rates of quality of what goes into those bins. one big problem. if you put a lot of stuff that could be recycled in there. cardboard is an obvious one with amazon boxes. you don't put motor oil in there. you don't care. it contaminates all of it and causes problems for the process. that is the part people don't think about. when you are trying to process the material you think about it. the last comment i will make is very heartened to see the responses from the city. telling people what to do versus

what not to do. this is a debate which is better. better to be positive and focus on what you should do. there is room for both. i have just coincidentally happened to get a flyer from a city council in the u.k. on their recycling. they had a green what to do and red hat what not to do. it was easy to see both sides. if you tell him not to put his hand on the stove you don't tell him everything not to do in the house. you tell him not to put his hand on the stone. stove. don't put anything smaller than a golf ball in the blue. the facility cannot pick those things out they are too small. simple things like that would help. i would look for a balance with

that. that is really about all of my comments. very straightforward. they get my thanks to team members for help with the report. >> thank you. is there another presenter? >> thank you for the opportunity. john said everything there is to say. >> thanks again for all of your work on this very interesting and very important topic. why don't we go to the presentation on the response. the city's response. i think we have a representative from sf environment to present. i want to note we have represents from recology available for questions.

>> chair mar, this is charles here from the san francisco department of environment. i want to give a quick introduction and ms. gurney will have a power point to add context to the findings and recommendations on the civil grand jury report. as he noted, we do agree with the findings and recommendations in the civil grand jury report. we do want to commend them for their look at recycling and underscoring that san francisco hahas been a leader in recyclin. thank you for your recommendations on how we can improve on where we come this far. i will turn it over for context abfindings. kara is leading the outreach time and we also have robert here, program manager for 08. he can assist with questions

after the presentation. >> hopefully everybody can see that. thank you, chair mar and supervisors peskin and haney and to the civil grand jury who participate understand the report. what happened to the things in the blue bin? i thought i would provide a little context and background. san francisco is very much zero waste. we have a goal of zero waste. our targets are to reduce generations 15% and disposal 50% by 2030. recycling is key to reach our target. with the focus of this report.

we thank you to the civil grand jury for commending us on our work thus far. the success of the recycling program is contributed to two things. the state-of-the-art possessing system. the department collaborates to educate the public in multiple languages to ensure they understand why recycling is important and how to participate in the program. we also work with recology to improve our recycling possessing to remove contaminants and our system includes investments in the local work force and high tech equipment. [please stand by.]

we agree with this. and not only do we agree with this, but we often get this question from the public. so updating recology's app to share this information will just enhance our public education experience. we'll post the information on our website by july 1, 2021. the final recommendation was to enhance the public education on

what doesn't belong. and we agreed this will cut down contamination and improve the material that we recycling, so we can continue to be competitive in the global market and domestic market. we agree this is an issue and want to continue to clean up our recycling. we'll post this on our website by july, 1, 2021. and we'll also do work around social media to make sure that the public truly understands the detrimental contaminants they should not be placing in the blue bin. we'll continue communicating with the public about these issues as they arise. thank you very much. i'd love to open it up to questions. >> thank you so much. and the responses to the civil

grand jury findings and recommendations. i just wanted to say that as a life long environmentalist and as somebody that even got my bachelor's degree in conservation resources back in the day, this issue is very interesting to me, but i think also important. i appreciate the grand jury's focus on it and all the washington that s.f. environment and recology have done in having san francisco an exemplary city in moving toward zero waste. i just have had questions or wondered about, yeah, the question of the civil grand jury report myself. i really appreciate this. i don't see in the report information about what the disposition of the various recyclable materials that we collect in blue bins.

i was wondering if you could speak to that. i know there is a commitment following the recommendations to start making that public. i think that's great. can you just share it. >> let me make a comment and then maybe she has a comment. there is a small section in there about where the material goes. one of the -- there is a couple of challenges there. and that's why i didn't get into a lot of it. first thing, it's very dynamic because the markets can come and go and change. so whatever you put in the report is probably not going to be true a year from now, so that's why i didn't put a heavy emphasis on it. there are some issues with respect to confidential information from a business perspective for recology. like you can't put, okay, i sent it to this guy and i got this much money for it, so you have to obstruct things to some degr degree. what our information was as already mentioned, the cardboard

paper material is largely going to southeast asia now and that's an important piece because by volume that is actually most of the material, right? and it's gotten worse since covid because of all the boxes being moved around. the other thing that i think is very important to note is one thing we certainly learned, is that the code one and code two, the triangle codes on the plastic, code 1 and 2 is very recyclable. it's much more than the other ones. code 5 is a maybe. and the rest are frankly bad. the markets aren't there. you can bundle the stuff all you want and store it, but if the market is not there, there is no place to sell it to. i think having people focus on code 1 and 2 when they're making a choice as a consumer i think will help. my understanding that is being recycled within the united states. and then on the last one, i learned, i have to honest with you, that glass is kind of a very difficult thing to recycle.

the glass actually comes out the back end of the process and it's this giant pile of little junk. and it's the only place inside pier 96 where the seagulls just flock like crazy. otherwise, it smells good. that pile, they go straight for it because it's so contaminated. so i think glass poses a real challenge. i know we do give it a facility, but basically it's a money-loser for the city. it's very difficult to recycle. i don't know if anyone else has a comment on that. >> thanks for that. i just -- and then i just have one other question for the sf environment. has this -- the recommendation that we're -- that you're agreeing with to make information about the disposition of the recyclable

materials public, was that something that you had considered or had already been working on? or is this a new -- >> it's a new thing. i mean we do it on a case-by-case basis. when we get that question, we'll update that information. it does change frequently. but i do believe that we get that question enough and frequently enough that you know making this information public will just enhance people's understanding of the process. and their commitment to it. so i don't think anything was in the works officially, but i do believe this will be helpful. >> great. good to hear. so supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair mar and to the civil grand jury for this report. it's not without a little bit of controversy, not of your making

at all, and it's good to know that the wade stream is working as intended and that we're leaders in recycling in the country. but obviously there have been some revelations in the last number of days relative to the relationship between the city and county as regulator in part and participant in part with what we call recology that is the subject of a 1932 voter approved ordinance 88 years ago. and i think i read that thing about 20 years ago and re-read it over the thanksgiving holiday. and it does -- and i don't want to get into the $62.5 million contract that the board sent back to committee on tuesday or any of that. that's not really pertinent to

what the civil grand jury has focused on. i don't want to go down that rabbit hole. but there is something interesting in the 1932 ordinance and it relates to the investigations which is that there are actually -- when you look at the report, 75% of that waste stream is paper and cardboard. didn't i see that? >> yeah, that's roughly correct. >> supervisor peskin: and i would like to use this opportunity -- because the 1932 ordinance appears to me -- albeit i am not a lawyer -- to actually exempt paper and cardboard provided that the customer is not paying anybody to have it removed. and, indeed, i think all of us see these trucks. there is a name, the mosquito fleet i think they are called, that go around and collect

cardboard primarily from restaurants and businesses, i don't know if they do it from residential customers, although there would be a source with amazon and the changing word. and they seem to be excluded from the 1932 voter approved monopoly ordinance. do we track or the civil grand jury track how much of that doesn't go to pier 96? and where it goes? and how that works? >> the civil grand jury -- thank you for the question. the civil grand jury did not directly look at that issue. what we did, we only looked at what happens to what is in the blue bin. so obviously by definition, you're talking about is not in the blue bin. so we didn't. i can tell you having been to pier 96 multiple times, i see those same trucks you're talking

about rolling in the back of the place because you can drop off recycling material through the back rather than through the trucks if you want. so... >> supervisor peskin: interesting. you're saying that some of that or all of that, or who knows how much of it, ends up at pier 96 and the mosquito fleet take it down and presumably sell it to recology, how does that work? >> from my understanding, basically they have in the back of pier 96, they have a retail place where you can come in with cans and bottles and drop your stuff off. it was closed for a while because of covid. i'm not sure it's open now. when i was there, it was open. you would see trucks come in, i'm not sure they have mosquito on the side, but they were trucks piled high with

cardboard. >> hello, this is phyllis dietz. the civil grand jury had no authority to delve into private businesses. >> supervisor peskin: got it. i don't know if anybody from recology just by virtue of these questions wants to address how the mosquito fleet works and how that is accounted for? >> yeah, i believe we have -- maurice? >> i see maurice. i see noel, robert hailey. everybody. >> so, yes, recology is represented. hi, noel with community relations team. i'm going to defer to maurice

for that response. >> you're still on mute. >> how about now? all right, the pier 96, my computer keeps defaulting back to mute. the facility is comprised of two components. we have the mixed to the west. on the east side of the building, we run a market facility where we purchase material from the general public. some of the people who come in, vast majority of the people that use that service are what you're referring to as the mosquito fleet. what we do in those situations, we scale in the trucks and we pay them what we believe is market value for the material they're bringing. in addition to cardboard and paper, we do operate a buyback center. unfortunately, because of covid and the restrictions that need

to be met, that portion of our building is shut down. and we're not purchasing cans and bottles at this time. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> supervisor mar: seniuperviso peskin, are you done? >> supervisor peskin: yes, sir. >> supervisor mar: why don't we go to public comment. mr. clerk, are there callers on the line? >> thank you, mr. chair. operation is checking to see if we have callers in the queue. please let us know if we have callers ready. for those who already connected, press star and 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, continue to wait until you're prompted to begin. you'll hear a prompt saying you've been unmuted. if you want to speak on this

item call in now. that would be calling 1-415-655-0001 and then he wanting 14621 # 57164 followed by pressing the pound symbol twice and then star. could you connect us to our first caller? >> can you hear me now? >> we can hear you. >> it's david pilpel. several comments on these items. despite whatever is in the news, city residents, businesses and city staff work hard every day to make a complex recycling collection and processing system that minimizes waste to landfill and commodity contamination,

maximizes commodity values and supports our climate, environmental and zero waste goals. the rate setting and regulatory scheme set by the 1932 ordinan e ordinance, it simple, complicated and unique at the same time. the residential services are comprehensive but the cost is at or less than other local cities. i agree with the thoughtful findings and recommendations of the civil grand jury. better education and targeted outreach by recology, the department of the environment and perhaps the department of public health who has a role in the 1932 ordinance, including mobile devices and using real-life examples should be pursued. slight content improvements to the quarterly reports from recology posted publicly sooner than they are now would improve transparency. i continue to engage meaningfully on these issues.

i thank the civil grand jury and the staff with the city and recology. and i hope for the future. and i'll just add that supervisor peskin's questions about recycling matters may warrant a separate hearing. thanks very much. >> thank you. could we be connected to the next caller, please? >> hello. i was somewhat concerned to hear somebody say, describe glass as a money-loser for the city. not because i necessarily think that, you know, glass is something that is something that is easier recycled or efficient. more, i'm concerned about the notion that recycling is

something that we do because it -- it provides income. the reasons that we recycle is because we're concerned about the environment. not because it's cheaper than just dumping trash. and so this idea of like, you know, pinching pennies, it's kind of concerning. and so i would encourage decision-makers to have in mind not just the fiscal impact, but the long-term environmental impact, because the long-term environmental impact, there is going to be financial consequences in the long term that will outweigh the short-term financial impact. the issue of glass, i understand that glass is not necessarily the most efficient thing to

recycle and just environmentally it may be environmentally better to dump it than to recycle it, but, yeah, i think that it's important that decisions be made not on the basis of what is best in terms of financial sense, but in terms of long-term environmental impact. thank you. >> thank you for sharing your comment. next caller, please. mr. chair, that completes the queue. >> supervisor mar: thank you. public comment is now closed. i want to thank -- once again thank the civil grand jury for all of your work on this very interesting and important report. and also thank you to san

francisco environment and recology for all of your good work on our exemplary recycling program that we have here in the city. so, colleagues, my office has distributed my proposed amendments to the resolution and i just wanted to summarize them. the board -- first of all, the board of supervisors reports to the presiding judge at the superior court that they agree with findings f-1, 2 and 3 and secondly that the board of supervisors reports that recommendatio recommendations r1, 2 and 3 will be implemented no later than july 1, 2021. i would add that we urge the san francisco department of the environment to ensure that these communications are available in multiple languages so that this important new information about the disposition of recycled

materials is available to non-english speakers as well. are there any comments or questions, colleagues? so i would ask that we adopt the amendment for item 6 as presented and that we recommend item 6 as amended to the full board and that we continue item 5, the hearing to the call of the chair, because they're -- we'll be able to confirm that they'll be implemented. >> on the motion offered by chair m chair mar. >> supervisor peskin: aye. >> supervisor haney: aye. >> supervisor mar: aye. >> mr. chair, there are three ayes. on the motion that the resolution be recommended as

amended for consideration on december 15th, supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: aye. >> supervisor haney: aye. >> supervisor mar: aye. >> mr. chair, there are three ayes. and then on the motion offered by chair mar that the the 5 be continued to the call of the clare. >> supervisor peskin: aye. >> supervisor haney: aye. >> supervisor mar: aye. >> there are three ayes. >> supervisor mar: thank you. thanks again, everyone, for this item. all three items. mr. clerk, can you call item number 7. >> item 7 is a resolution condemning the naming of the san francisco general hospital and trauma center after priscilla chan and mark zuckerberg and urging city departments to establish clear standards with regards to naming rights for public institutions and

properties that reflect san francisco's values and the commitment to affirming and upholding human rights, digny and social and racial justice. members of the public who wish to comment on this should call now. call 1-415-655-0001. enter today the meeting i.d., 1462157375. press the pound symbol twice to connect to the meeting and then press the star key followed by 3 to enter the queue to wait. mr. chair? >> supervisor mar: thank you. colleagues, i offer this resolution because san francisco's only public hospital should not bear the name of a person responsible for endangering public health in our country and around the world and yet it does. facebook, the company, the platform and the policies that

guide it is also a threat to our democracy. they've emphasized please threats and violence. it promotes propaganda over journalism, lies over truth, fake news over fact. and in the midst of the pandemic misinformation. these are policy choices and they have a body count. through this resolution i'm proposing with econdemn the -- we condemn the renaming of the hospital after the chairman and c.e.o. of facebook, because the facts condemn facebook. and mr. zuckerberg has refused to take responsibility. i won't recite all the evidence cited in this resolution because i think it speaks for itself and shares the breadth and depth of reason. from endangering the privacy rights of the public to the flourishing of racial resentment and white supremacy on its

platform to monetizing misinformation. the reason that facebook is not reflective of san francisco values and why the founder and c.e.o. should not hold the name of our public hospital. the integrity of the city and our public health institutions shouldn't be for sale. while zuckerberg gave a sizeable donation to s.f. general hospital, the fact is this is an institution by and for the people of the city and the people of the city have funded at least 90% of the $1.244 billion in construction and furnishing costs of this hospital. this hospital belongs to the people whose health, wellness an privacy and in some cases lives are in peril after the man it's named after. i think the board of supervisors made a mistake in approving this naming contract five years ago. five years since that vote have

only gone to show how wrong the decision is. i prepared amendments to the resolution which my office has distributed by e-mail updating it to add the evidence of facebook's harm that has been revealed just since we introduced it. including two studies showing how life-threatening misinformation about covid-19 proliferates on facebook. i want to thank my cosponsor supervisor haney and also thank you, supervisor peskin, for your prior leadership on this. and i want to thank andrea for the partnership and the nurses and staff at s.f. general for their leadership and advocacy on the issue. colleagues, i urge your support of these amendments and ask you support the resolution. supervisor haney? >> supervisor haney: i don't have a lot to add. i want to thank you, supervisor mar, for your leadership and

partnership on this. san francisco general hospital is the jewel of our city. it serves countless residents and safes lives, especially during this pandemic. and i want to acknowledge and recognize the hard work of the people who work at that institution. they deserve to be proud of the place that they go to work every day. they deserve to have a name that reflects the public nature of this most essential institution. and i also want to acknowledge that the nurses and leadership of people who work at general hospital for bringing this forward for raising their voices for years now on this issue. and i think it's important that our board send a clear message about where we stand on this. particularly, in light of what happened in recent months and years at facebook and with mr.

zuckerberg. they've been the source of employee walkouts and boycott campaigns by large corporations because of the behavior. and i think we should all stand in solidarity with the employees of facebook who have been organizing as well as we do this. we're thankful for the gift and thankful for any gift to our most important institutions during this time, but that doesn't mean that we should forever essentially have given away advertising rights on this most essential public institution. so thank you, chair mar. i know supervisor peskin has been a leader on speaking out on this for some time as well. so, thank you, and i hope the full board will join us in this. >> supervisor mar: thank you, supervisor haney. supervisor peskin, any remarks? we go to public comment. mr. clerk, are there callers on the line?

>> operation is checking now to see if we have callers in the queue. let us know if we have callers. for those already connected to the meeting, press star followed by 3 to be added to the queue if you wish to speak. for those on hold in the queue, please continue to wait until you're prompted to begin. you'll hear a prompt that your line has been unmuted. for those those watching on tv, if you wish to speak, call now. that is by dialing 1-415-655-0001, following that you would enter the meeting i.d. 1462157375. and then you would press the pound symbol twice and then press star followed by 3 to enter the queue to speak. can you connect us to our first caller, please?

>> hi, supervisors. i'm glad to be here. i'm andrea and a san francisco resident and a long time peace and justice advocate and i'm activist at the group called the facebook coalition. and i'm here today because i really believe -- own backyard in the san francisco bay area and actually -- [indiscernible] was in our backyard, not the other way around. but that we in the bay area have a responsibility to call out facebook. [please stand by] [please stand by]

>> thank you for your work, and

i hope that you will pass this resolution. >> clerk: thank you very much for sharing your comments. mr. qiu, could you bring us the next comments, please. >> hello, supervisors. good afternoon. this is tracey rosenberg, calling on behalf of the protest facebook coalition to ask for your support for this resolution today. a study was done by the tao center for journalism at cornell university this year reporting the challenges in coverage the covid-19 pandemic, and of the obstacles that reporters mentioned in this study, facebook was number one, and i want to repeat that. facebook was the biggest obstacle to reporters trying to

provide accurate public health information about this pandemic that we have been struggling with close to a year. when you have a corporation that is working at cross purposes with our public health department, with the hard work of people at san francisco general, with really everything that the city is trying to do to protect the residents of the city, then that's something that we have to pay attention to. and in this particular case, we basically have sold off the name of our public institution to an entity that is working at cross purposes to the people of this city, and so we're asking you to stay that was the wrong thing to do. we're not going to do it in the future, and we condemn that it

happened. so again, thank you, and please support the 800-plus advertisers speaking out with the protest facebook coalition, and all of the reporter who's struggling againsta state odds -- >> clerk: thank you for your comments, tracey rosenberg. mr. qiu, could you bring us the next comment, please. >> hello. my name is kim meredith. can you hear me? >> supervisor mar: yes, we can hear you. >> i'm the c.e.o. -- thank you. i'm the c.e.o. at san francisco general hospital foundation. our mission is to support the s.f.g. with the central funding

and access to quality care for all. timing is everything. we are in the middle of a pandemic, and over 30% of all san francisco covid-19 patients have been cared for at the s.f.g. san francisco passed a bond with 80% of the voters supporting a new hospital. the funds supporting the building, but nothing inside. philanthropic contributions from many individuals and corporations were vital. can you imagine a hospital without hospital beds, lights, or emergency room equipment? in 2015, priscilla chan and her husband made a philanthropic gift of $75 million. without a modern public hospital, san francisco would not have had a health care unit, been a health care leader and been a model during the

pandemic. the deaths in san francisco only recently reached 160 souls compared to other similar size cities. these gave you, our kricivic leaders the protocols to practice social distancing and sheltering in place. this resolution on the condemnation of the naming of s.f.g. has the potential of unintended consequences and a chilling effect on past, present, and future gifts to the city on what are, in my perspective, public hospitals. san francisco has a remarkable history of integrated public health care system -- >> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments, kim meredith. could we get the next caller,

please. >> supervisors, we kept taking money from companies without discerning. this is discerning. i was listening to a similar type of conversation about our right of expression and also how you all try to go beating around the bush, cannot be forth right. so when this happened, we had a director that was since fired. so it happened again and again -- i'm not blaming all of

you supervisors, but some of you are part of it. some of you are not educated on issues. who built that hospital? the old hospital was built by the people from the bayview, a great portion of the building during model cities. but learn your history. and then, you know, we allocate the money, the money is not spent right, and then, because of whatever reason, we need to go to entities like facebook or google, and we take their money. we are doing it right now. we're taking google's money, we're taking salesforce's money, and we don't consult or represent the constituents of san francisco. you all are making a

laughingstock of yourselves by first accepting the money, up and down -- pandering to priscilla -- >> clerk: thank you for sharing yourme comments, mr. decosta. next caller. >> i'm wondering why this decision is being made now, because people have been protesting the name change for years. this is really a resolution that is made too late. and the gift that's given, $75 million, that's really paltry. mark zuckerberg's net worth is $100 billion, $100 billion. and not just that. if you consider the expenditures of san francisco general, i'm looking at the

2010-2011 department of public health budget, it says their expenditures in 2010-2011 were $675 million, and that was a decade ago, so i'm sure there are even more now. 75 million, that's, like, i don't know, one-ninth of that. that's maybe 10% of the expenditures now, so mark zuckerberg paid 10% of expenditures for one year, and he gets to put his name on the hospital for all eternity, so yeah. i mean, honestly, it's just, like, a really bad deal. if we were to bestow the name -- you could have just made a better deal.

if they had built the hospital, then you could say okay, it makes sense to put his name on the hospital. but all he did was give enough to pay for 10% of the hospital for a year. so yeah, i mean, honestly, i don't think this has anything to do with whether or not mark zuckerberg is a good person or whether facebook is a good company, it's just like he -- >> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments. could we get the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. this is peter warfield, executive director of library users association. we can be reached at libraryusers2004@yahoo.com. we need to consider some of the steps that need to be taken.

we particularly encourage at the least an expansion of the standards that this legislation recommends being required of individual departments. not just the department's develop naming opportunity procedures, but that such supervisors require naming approval, as well as the ongoing advocacy of specific businesses by city agencies. at san francisco public library, for example, there's a long list of opportunities for naming rooms, contents of rooms, and bookcases. for a low monthly fee, the library touts facebook and other social media. get social, it says multiple times in each issue. the on-line version even drunks direct links, and there have

been large banners outside the branch recent, like us on facebook. all such touting of outside companies by city agencies should be subject to decision making at the board of supervisors. i'd like to point out that the existing s.f. general agreement is to last for 50 years, and includes millions of dollars for the donors to tout future philanthropic support for sfgh. we support this, but stronger measures are needed. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. can we get the next caller, please. >> hello, supervisors. thank you very much for the opportunity to voice my opinion on this matter. i urge all of you to adopt this resolution, especially in light of the gross negligence and

unethical monopolistic behavior of facebook. every time that the name of san francisco general hospital is uttered, it is free publicity for this platform, so the brand of mark zuckerberg and the company that he owns is inextrickablely tied to the public health of the city, so i strongly condemn the coopting of our most precious resource: our frontline workers, our facilities, especially now, in the time of the covid pandemic, by this reckless, amoral profiteer to furnish -- or sorry, to advertise his brand on our public buildings.

so again, i urge you to adopt this resolution to strongly don dem this so-called public-private partnership, which is really a chance to profit off of our public resources, and do everything in your power to sever our crown jewel in our city of public health from this profiting monopolistic corporation that continues to show how awful it is. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments. could we get the next caller, please? >> hi, hello. my name is laurie leaderman. i'd like to thank supervisors mar and haney for this resolution, which i strongly support. san francisco general was built by the people of san francisco long before zuckerberg was born. it was expanded and supported by bonds that we voted for far

beyond his donation. general is the people's hospital. it is the health care providers who deliver skilled medical care, the administrative and support staff, the stationary engineers who keep the moving parts humming, the construction workers who built it, these are who we should honor, not one ultrarich egotist. it is an affront to the people of san francisco who paid for, built, and maintain vital health care at this historic institution to name it after a corrupt billion aire who continues to thrive on profits from hate speech and misinformation. this shows how vital it is to establish naming criteria to the future. please move this to the full board with recommendation. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments, lori leaderman. could we get the next caller,

please. >> thank you, supervisors. my name is sasha cutler, and i am a facebook addict. that's your cue to say, hello, sasha. can you hear me? if you're listening, mark zuckerberg, and dr. priscilla chan, i've been a nurse at san francisco general hospital when you were children. it's said that you did not ask to have the hospital named after you after your donation of $75 million. i urge you to call in and offer to give the name back. i hope mo i don't think i should even have an air purefiifier named after it, no matter how much i

deserve it. when i worked at the san francisco aids foundation in the late 1980s, there were a handful of people that hiv did not cause aids, and there were a handful of people that state that condoms didn't work. your contagion machine has put public misinformation on steroids. i began to organize against the hospital name change initially because facebook performed the largest clinical trial on people without their consent. their goal was to spread emotions like a disease, and it worked. our health care workforce and the communities we serve are suffering. instead of flattening the curve, we are getting flattened with about 400 california health care workers every day being reported to be infected. at least 218 of us have died with covid-19 in just ten months. a couple of months ago, steve

bannon called for the beheading of anthony fauci on your platform. it took ten hours for the posting to be banned, but he was not banned from facebook. >> clerk: thank you very much for your comments, sasha cutler. next comment, please. >> hello. my name is mike dingle, and i worked with sasha cutler in the early days before the name change of san francisco general. i worked there until 2018, and nowhere was anyone consulted, or it should have been a referendum, at the very least. my hope, as is sasha's, that mr. zuckerberg, will have a wonderful epiphany and call in and say, please relinquish my naming rights and let it be

just san francisco general again. i will echoing the othermen comments, and in the spirit of brevity, i will wrap it up. let's take the zuckerberg name off of the san francisco general hospital and trauma center. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you, mike dingle. could we get the next caller, please. >> hello. my name is guy van denberg. i'm a nurse at san francisco general hospital. i'm honored to speak to you after my friend and colleague, sasha cutler and mike dingle did. thank you, supervisors haney, gordon mar, and peskin, for moving this forward. i agree what's been set up to here is a matter of principle. we don't want to have chick-fil-a golden gate bridge. we don't want a trump tower

water purification plant in our city. i came to san francisco in the 80s, worked my nursing rotations at the san francisco general, worked on 5-a, the aids ward, and many years as ward 86, the aids ward. it's personal to me, when i'm now in covid tracing and case investigation, when i hear people call this hospital zuckerberg. it's san francisco general hospital, and please restore that name. i thank you. >> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments. could we get the next caller, please. >> hello. my name is don blitz. i'm a private citizen long-term san francisco resident. i'm a resident of matt ne