do some preliminary information gathering to better understand kind of what racial equity looks like in terms of our permitholders. which are sort of our constituency as a regulatory body and what that looks like and do an assessment how that compares to the city as a whole. >> thank you, commissioner thomas. i echo everything that you are saying. i'm glad that you colleagues from office of cannabis has come in to provide the a.d.m. presentation for us to even proceed into phase 2. really important to see how everything is structured within phase 1. i do think that in terms of how

we can do some preplanning, that will be great to address during upcoming retreat in march. we can nominate a racial equity lead within our very small but mighty commission of seven. with that said, are there other commissioner comments or questions? >> good evening. first, i see this is a huge list. you guys actually covered a lot of material in them, compliments to the three of you to make it engaging. one thought i did have. lot of people in the city don't know what the city administrator's job does. maybe you guys can quickly touch on maybe some of the larger agencies you guys represent. there could be people watching tonight that see real opportunity here and make this some of those departments you guys represent.

just a thought. >> yeah, absolutely. we can all taking turn to remember all of them. >> i know there's a lot. >> medical examiner is one of them, office of cannabis, d.p.w. they have their own budget. they did make their own plans. i can keep going. if you want to get married at city hall, if you want to do anything at city hall, i'm going to have others -- [indiscernible]

treasure island. >> project monitoring division. they're all different and specialized. there's a lot of overlap. there was a lot of similarity around our core values what mattered to us. we touch all of san francisco. this work is so important that we dug in and engaged and reached out to work with the office of racial equity. this is super important. we are impacting lot of people. we'll continue to that as we start to lookout ward with

respect to our staff. we're going to take our time with it. i'm hearing lot of positive things on this call. thank you commissioner caminong for talking about a lead. any way that we can be helpful, certainly reach out. here you are. these are all by departments that fall under the city administrator's office. everything is highlighted in yellow is quite a lot. >> vice president caminong: than k you so much. great job. congratulations. >> thank you. >> president bleiman: are there any other questions? all right.

if you want to do this again. >> all of you will be famous. [laughter] thank you very much for having us today. we really appreciate it. >> bye everybody, stay safe. >> you too. >> president bleiman: let's open up for public comment. do we have anyone here for public comment? >> i'm checking now. there's nobody with their hand raised.

i'm going to stop the screen share. we don't have any one who wants to say anything. >> good-bye everyone. >> president bleiman: item number 5, update on nightlife, business assistance in response to covid-19 presented by ben van houten, the beard, business development manager for nightlife and entertainment sector within the office of economic workforce development. please bring up mr. ben. >> good evening commissioners. great to be here again. ben van houten, office of economic workforce development. i will try to bring up some

slides. it says i need to quit zoom. >> if you want help, e-mail my g-mail and then i can get it

going. >> i updated my mac operating it system, now i'm paying for years of procrastination. >> understood. >> my slides are generally not going to be too much of a surprise in most respects. i don't want to waste any more of the commission's time. i'm happy to present as is without the slides. we have a few updates to provide on a couple of items that i had updated you all on last

commission hearing then also have some new program materials as well to announce. the mayor in january announced a new $62 million plan for financial relief for small businesses. that includes relief grants totaling $12.4 million, proposed program to help stabilize small business operations, grants ranging from $5000 to $20,000 in amount. the goal here of this program, which will launch in february, is to reach businesses across the city and high need neighborhoods in particular. looking forward to the launch of that san francisco relief grants program. in addition, the mayor relief plan calls for a $50 million loan program. the sf community investment loan

is the program aimed specifically at the supporting businesses, especially those who have been left out of existing relief programs including businesses that earn above $2.5 million in gross receipts annually who have been left out of the existing relief programs to date. more information about both of those programs as they are developed and they are launched will be available on our website, oewd.org/covid-19 where you can find all the information there. the second update for all of you -- oh, thank you maggie. thank you team. the second update for all of you

-- the california small business covid-19 relief grants, we talked about this during the last presentation update. at that point, round one was open. round one closed and a number of businesses got updates but they have been wait listed for the relief grant. which is frustrating for small business owners who are challenged to look for relief across the board. that was frustrating. the second round of applications is open now. these are grants up to $25,000 for small business from the state. any business that was wait listed in the first round, country need to reapply this round. the second round, which is the final round, closes on february 8th with businesses to find out more updates to follow after that.

the shutter venue operator grants, that's the new name save our stages. i think it rolls off the tongue less well. we don't have a ton to update on in terms of the timing of the shutter venue operators it grant program. there's a lot of anxiety and concern among venue operators to make sure they're able to apply in a timely manner. one thing i do want to flag, the s.b.a. did publish an f.a.q document for the program. i would encourage businesses that want to know more about just where the informationing is, where the thinking is now for s.b.a.

there's some useful tips about getting ready to apply and some things you can do to register with the federal government, register your business or just be be ready to apply for the s.v.o. grants. we're all waiting for more information that we can share with the business community. on the local fee and tax waivers, previously i think we said that businesses that had already paid these taxes and fees that are eligible for refunds would need to submit an application to get a refund. they will get an automatic refund. businesses should have gotten a letter from the treasury and tax collector office, letting them know they'll be getting an automatic refund of any fees and taxes that they prepaid. that's good news that's on its

way. finally, this is really out of the conversation commissioners you had at the last hearing. in terms of business permits, i don't think we have discussed the rollout of proposition h. there's been some discussions. please do report that proposition h, save our small business -- initiative that's fully in effect. ton of credit for the planning department for implementing proposition h especially to all the business permitting and speeding up business permitting over the last couple of months. this is a high level bold point list some of the things that are possible now thanks to this ballot measure. part of which is around zoning

reforms and emphasis on temporary uses and pop up retail uses. expanding greater potential there. just as the business permitting process for businesses that are permitted in our neighborhoods. really should be much faster for good number of folks. that's really exciting. it's a successful effort that we're looking forward to educate the business community and time they can save, especially as we head toward recovery and i think it's they're in alignment with the discussions about thinking, building off successes like this. what more can be done around entertainment, permit process, entertainment code process, looking forward to continuing those conversations with all of you in the future. i think that's it.

oewd.org/covid 19 has updates on resources and grants and loans and other tools and resources for the business community but happy to answer any questions. my apologies for the technical delays, i promised that by march, this is going to be -- i'm not touching this computer except to solve some presentation problems. i'm looking forward to it. >> you did great. we figured it out. >> when the grants finally come in, who's going to be the clearinghouse? is there going to be another third party again that review these applications? somebody in your department going to be screening the application? when they them offered before, seem that the third party people

distributing these are making decisions. we're really explaining why we were either turned down or what. i'm just wondering, are they considering a more transparent situation or we're back to the same process. >> that's a really good question. i think highlights the challenges, some of the challenges that businesses are experiencing. you go to a site that is not a city site or a website that you know and you put in your information, i think that is helpful feedback. that is responsive to some of the challenges i heard folks express around the state grant process and other grant processes. i will definitely take that back to our team. this is stuff all still happening it in realtime.

i think that to the extent, we do use and rely upon a variety of community partners that we can all collectively work together to better improve clarity and transparency so it really feels like a meaningful use of business. >> the state obviously in the last round of money, already ran out. we're all on the waiting list. luckily, they're going for round two. that's encouraging. everybody was very discouraged. they thought that was it. they didn't realize there was a second round coming. we'll see. hopefully. cross our fingers. thank god for outdoor dining.

that helps. >> absolutely. >> any other comments or questions? one thing i would like to acknowledge, thank you for making time to make the monthly presentation on our agenda. i think it was a really great addition to have you. thank you for spending your tuesday night with us. >> thank you. it's really my pleasure. looking forward to continuing to work with allful you -- all of you on all of this important stuff. >> we appreciate you, ben. >> thank you. likewise. >> let's move on to public comment on item 5. >> there are no hands raised. there are no comments in the

chat. >> there's a ben b. in the attendee list now. that could be our ben v. who was on the call. >> that seems likely. [laughter] >> it's just a coincidence. >> thank you. seeing none, public comment is closed. the next item on the agenda is number 6, the report from the deputy director. presented by deputy director azevedo. >> good evening commissioners. the enforcement report that has been uploaded for your review has included three new

complaints which is in conjunction with the new health order that came out on january 25th. i didn't highlight any of them, there were really none of note. i want to mention that two of the three, one was unfounded, one is being handled by constituent attorney's office and the current one is under current enforcement review. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. i do anticipate we'll see more complaints coming in now that outdoor dining and activities are allowed again. it was really quiet for the month of december and beginning of january. that's my high level update. we do have inspectors out in the field on the weekends and working late night. we do have coverage. >> commissioners are there any

comments or questions for the deputy director? kaitlyn, we look forward to hearing from you during the next meeting. let's move ton to public comment. is there any public comment to report from the deputy director? >> there are no hands raised and no comments in the chat. >> seeing none, the public comment is now closed. the next item on the agenda is item 7 is the election of vice president. this item allow the commissioners to nominate and elect the seat of the vice president of the entertainment commission to fill out the term from february 2, 2021 to july 6, 2021.

>> did i miss something? are we suppose to take action? >> are you interested in running again? >> i was going to nominate dori, i'll nominate her. >> second. >> to answer the question, yes, it has been an honor serving as vice president. i do think that -- i want to acknowledge mr. bleiman's leadership as president of the commission. just the work that we've been putting in together t especially during the pandemic and showing up for our community here. answer is yes. we have a first from commissioner falzon and second from commissioner thomas. please take a vote. >> did you forget to do public comment? >> we should ask if there's any

other nominations. >> okay. commissioners? are there any other nominations? doesn't look like it. okay, is there any public comment on this item? >> there are no public comments. >> thank you. please take a vote. [roll call vote]. >> thank you.

congratulations. >> well done. >> the next item on the agenda is item number 8, the election of the president of the entertainment commission. this item allows the commissioners to nominate and elect the seat of the president of the entertainment commission to fill out the term from february 2, 2021 to july 6, 2021. >> i would like to nominate ben bleiman to finish out term as president. >> second. >> i'm sorry i'm on the road. i want to say that serving as president of this commission has been a great joy and honor. especially during covid, there's a lot going on, kind of like the duck part where you see what's

going on top of the water and under the water, incredible amount of action and movement. just working with staff and working where all of you and vice president, maggie and ben. it's been really good work. i love this job, i appreciate your confidence in me. thank you. >> is there any public comment on this item? >> there are no hands raised. there are no comments in the chat. >> sorry, any other nominations? [laughter] >> i don't think there are any other nominations. >> [roll call vote]

>> thank you guys. great. congratulations. president bleiman. next item on the agenda is item 9. new business request for the future agenda items. is there any item you like to address? >> vice president caminong i had a thought. i like the equity manager.

did you want to make that an agenda item? >> vice president caminong: i think we can discuss that more during the retreat. this is within our upcoming session. >> no worries, perfect. >> just to agree with that to put the racial equity issue on our retreat agenda and just thinking how do we what our baseline is, how we go about setting goals around racial equity if we want to address any of the recommendations around internal resolution and a representative to the racial equity work group and so on. that does seem like that's a good topic for us to tackle at the retreat when we got a bit more time and space to dig into issues. i know what racial equity work looks like in other places. i got less of a sense of how to

measure or set goals related to the work that we do. i don't know if there are other entities around the country that look at entertainment with a racial equity lens that might learn something from. i have nothing in mind. i don't know if staff have any thoughts or any model we can borrow from. >> to say, though, at least with our most recent application, the jam application, we did collect racial demographic information for every applicant for that program. it's something we can consider trying to implement across existing permit holders. we can find a way for that. i wanted to add that in. >> obviously you get into -- i

don't necessarily want to make our application process more difficult or try to go back and collect data we haven't been collecting. that's also only way to get a baseline or sense of where the gap inequities might be. figuring out the best way to tackle that, that is not disruppive or burdensome to our permit holders but give useful information. >> i don't know if this is more of -- what can we do about -- when the health department says, you can do outdoor dining but you can't turn on your television to watch the super bowl game. they're not really dancing or

anything. are we as commission to challenge those or do we have to go along with it? it defeats the purpose in the sense. there's still limited capacity. i'm just curious is this something we allowed to do as a promotion or promoting entertainment, not really promoting entertainment, but it seems like the television thing. i get if you got a d.j. on tv and you're out there promoting. if you're eating and watching, even the news, even watching the election or something. are these kind of decisions made. we know it's based on safety. is it really good for business? i want to put that out there.

>> what the current role around outdoor tv with outdoor dining. >> it reads the same as prior outdoor dining allowances were. which is, it is permitted in the outdoor space. tvsare inside. permitted in the outdoor space and the way it was translated to the entertainment commission was that audio was being amplified. some businesses just take the tout having no volume. they just show a game or what have you in the background. that would not require a jam permit. >> that is still allowable per the health order. >> is there something else

commissioner lee to relative? are you talking about indoor tvs? >> i know that walnut creek i saw on the news, it gets confusing. every city is different. >> okay, we're allowing it. >> san francisco allowing it. walnut creek they're saying, turn off the tv. >> essentially the rules around allowing outdoor amplify sounds including tv, you have to prevent any gathering. that does happen. where businesses either encourage it or it gets out of hand and they have to mitigate any crowding that could happen even over watching a football game. especially the super bowl. luckily it's the 49ers around playing -- >> what about indoor? indoor you can't even turn on your tvs if you want to do indoor. >> yeah.

that is right. with indoor dining, it's not allowing tvs because of that gathering element. essentially they wanted to discourage indoor as well. the health officer was just allowing her indoor to be able to allow for more business expansion and economic growth. in terms of health, it was meeting halfway. i think tvs was something that would potentially encourage more gathering inside which is not good. >> i think, as entertainment commissioners, some tvs -- it's really the control of the venue itself, maybe law enforcement, how we all talking about law enforcement and stuff. any way this commission we can negotiate or try to work out to see how we can help?

>> i would say for the specific issue, it doesn't actually -- it's not relevant for commission when we're talking about indoor tv usage. that doesn't require a permit from us. >> i know, all around it's all about small business. it's nice to watch something while you're eating. >> i would defer to your colleague if they have any >> -- >> what do you think guys? not to have television is -- >> steve, are you suggesting that we would support urge letter to the department of public health? >> not just a letter, we got dome up with some suggestions.

maybe some identify ideas how these things can work. we're the industry experts, they're not. i'm not going to challenge them on health decisions. they should listen to us on entertainment decisions. we're the ones that promote safety and everything. make sure all small businesses do well in san francisco. i know that the health department seems to have the big pull. if we're talking about helping a new business idea and we're promoting entertainment or even business, i think we should think of some best practices that may be the health department hasn't even thought about. they're only thinking one way. i know there's a lot of struggling businesses that can use little bit of suggestion or best practices.

i'm throwing it out there. i'm not saying we should do it. i don't know if we can do it. i look around and see we're just happy that outdoor dining is there when we do partial indoor dining, it's going to help. there's nothing to do on the inside. certain restaurants is fine, but other places, it's kind of boring. just going to eat. i get it. i thought may be there's something we can do. >> i would say, i think that some of that depends on is it a health issue or is it an entertainment issue? it's like plenty of things that would help entertainment businesses but might create negative health interactions or increase risk for people. i feel like, that's the crux of

this and the health department is looking at it through a health lens. we can look at it through economic or business lens, we have to figure out what the health issues are and sort of what's the most business can do without creating health risk for their patrons. i don't know the answer to that. does tv draw people too close together or not. it might be that it doesn't. i think that's a conversation we'd have to have folks at the health department about what was behind their restrictions and what have we seen in practice. >> i tend to agree with commissioner thomas on this. i think that's the lens which we have to approach this.

if you have like a list of industry best practices, you don't think has been considered, we can look at them as a group >> there's not much best practices other than keeping everybody apart. it's obvious they don't want tvs that draws in the people. that's basically what the television does. if the food doesn't bring them in, what else brings them in. obviously gatherings and stuff. but if it's under control like they supposed to be, having a tv on with no sound may be would be better. that's at least a compromise. that's all i'm saying. the commission should be helping. whether they have a permit or not. small business is small business. we're all there to help small business in one way or another.

it might not be our jurisdiction. but we are industry experts. it will be nice to have conversation with the health department and talk about these things. other people are suing the government because there's no data before all that money was wasted money and all these lawsuits. maybe we can prevent some of that stuff. some people are desperate right now. it's something to think about. >> we are developing another survey for our permit holders for folks to take. i don't know where we're planning, when we're planning to launch the survey. maybe we can actually incorporate questions around issues like these. i'm sure there are other things that you're thinking about that could be also included in the survey. that way when we release this

data, we'll have the evidence to show this is the demand. >> that will be great. i don't have a clue either. i think it's something we as a group can talk about may be. i think it's not fair. we don't want to promote anybody getting sick. there's got to be a way. there's always some kind of solution. got to think positive you guys. >> thank you steven. is there any additional comments or questions from the commissioners? okay, let's move on to public comment on this item. >> there's nobody in the attendees list. there's no chats. >> moving on to the final item

on our agenda, item number 10, commissioner comments and questions. i would like to propose roll item 9 and 10 together. [laughter] just to keep us in single digits for agenda items. >> will do. >> okay. all right, thank you everybody. i got to take public comment. is there any public comment on item number 10? >> there are no hands raised. there are no comments in the chat. >> awesome. public comment is closed. we'll adjourn this meeting at 7:03 p.m. thank you everybody.

>> welcome to the remote hearing

first, february, 4, 2021. on february 25, 2020 the mayor declared local emergency and authorized the planning committer for shelter the place. this is our 40th remote hearing. if you are not speaking, mute your microphone. for public participation we are streaming this hearing live at sfgovtv. comments or community goes to speak are available at 415-655-0001 access code (146)503-3971. when we reach the item you are interested in press star and 3 to be added to the queue. when you hear your line is

unmuted begin speaking. each superior is allowed up to three minutes. when your time is reached i will take the next person in the queue to speak. call from a quiet location, speak slowly and mute volume on your television or computer. take roll at this time. >> koppel. >> here. >> vice president moore. >> yes. >> commissioner chan. >> yes. >> commissioner diamond. >> hear. >> commissioner fung. >> here. >> commissioner imperial. >> here. >> commissioner tanner. >> here. >> thank you. first is consideration items for proposed continuance. 1. 2020-003223 c.u.a. at 249 texas street. this is to continue to

march 4th, 2021. 2. case 2019-021010 c.u.a. is withdrawn. further under regular calendar item 10 case 2013.1535 at 474 o'farrell street street and 532 jones street conditional use authorization is requesting continuians to march 11, 2021. item 11. 2018-014795 at 1516 folsom street requests continuance to february 18, 2021. i have no other items for continuance. we should open this up for public comment. members of the public this is your opportunity to speak for any items proposed for

continuance. press star 3. one member of the public. you have two minutes. >> good afternoon. this is ella strong, president of the executive board of church of christ scientist. cosponsors of o'farrell street street and request continuance of our item. thank you. >> thank you. >> last call for public comment on items to be continued. no further requests or additional requests for public comment, public comment is closed. the matter is now before you. >> commissioner imperial. >> move to continue items

proposed. 1, 2, 10, 11. >> second. >> thank you on that motion to continue all items. commissioner tanner. >> aye. >> commissioner chan. >> aye. >> commissioner diamond. >> aye. >> commissioner fung. >> aye. >> commissioner imperial. >> aye. >> commissioner moore. >> aye. >> commissioner president koppel. >> aye. >> that passes 7-0. that puts us on your consent calendar. only one item on consent. that is your consent calendar to be routine by the planning commission by a roll call vote of the commission. no separate discussion unless a member of the commission or public or staff requests. then it shall be removed and considered at a separate item. 3.

2020-007346 c.u.a. this is 2284-2286 union street. we will take public comment for anyone wishing to pull this off consent. members of the public press star three. no members requesting to speak at this time public comment is closed. your consent calendar is now before you. >> commissioner moore. >> i move to approve. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners. that motion to approve item 3 under consent calendar commissioner tanner. >> aye. >> commissioner chan. >> aye. >> commissioner diamond. >> aye. >> commissioner fung. >> aye. >> commissioner imperial. >> aye. >> commissioner moore. >> aye. >> commission president koppel. >> aye. >> so moved. that passes unanimously. that places us on commission

matters. 4. consideration of adoption draft minutes january 21, 2021. we should take public comment. members of the public this is your opportunity to address the minutes. no members of the public to speak public comment is closed. minutes are now before you. >> commissioner diamond. >> move to approve the minutes. >> second. >> on that motion to adopt minutes from january 21, 2021 commissioner tanner. >> aye. >> commissioner chan. >> aye. >> commissioner diamond. >> aye. >> commissioner fung. >> aye. >> commissioner imperial. >> aye. >> commissioner moore. >> aye. >> commissioner president koppel. >> aye. >> so moved that motion passes unanimously 7-0. >> item 5. commission comments and

questions. okay. moving right alongying no requests to speak from commissioners. department matters. item 6. directors announcements. >> no announcements today. >> all right. item 7. review of past events at the board of supervisors, board of appeals did not meet and historic preservation commission met yet yesterday. there is a brief report. >> manager of legislative affairs. at the hearing no planning department items. the full board approved the landmark des designation by supervisor haney. supervisor mandelman introduced review of large residence

development and issued four units in rh districts on corner lots and lots within a half-mile of gated transit stations. as the ordinance is not drafted i don't have that one. the large home ordinance requires conditional use authorization on any projects in rh with more than 2500 gross square feet less is increasing more than 50% or up to 2500 square feet. it does provide exception to the 50% rule so long as the project increases density. no resulting units over 2500 square feet less than a third the size of the largest and subject is not historic resource. allows 10% increase for buildings 2500 square feet or more. members of the berkeley city

council announced they are introducing a resolution end to exclusionary zoning laws in addition to sacramento and portland is positive trend in the housing policy on the west coast. that is all today and i am happy to take any questions. >> commissioner tanner. >> thank you. the regulation or proposed legislation no house over 2500 square feet in the city. that property could add another unit and that is no unit over 2500 square feet? i am confused how that would relieve the limit of the size. >> it only helps with a 1200 square foot home and you want to increase more than 50%. you are below 25 but below 50%.

that is the only exception. >> thank you. >> if there are no additional questions regarding the board of supervisors, historic preservation met yesterday and considered the department 2021 budget and add adopted recommendation for your approval today. they considered two legacy business registries agcr body. second for g and son hardware. the only important thing here is both of these legacy business applicants are in district 10. they considered the preservation alternatives for proposed development project at 1101-23 sutter street. if there are no questions related to the historic preservation we can move on.

general public comment. each member of the public may address commission for up to three minutes. when the number of speakers exceed 15 minutes it may be moved to the end of the agenda. this is your opportunity to speak to general public comment by pressing star 3. you will have three minutes. >> good afternoon, commissioners, this is georgia. i sent you an e-mail yesterday with an attachment. i want to clarify something i wrote in the e-mail about the quote from the president of the