not here. >> clerk: i am double-checking to see if she is logged in. i do not see a log-in at the moment, but it is a long list, so she may not be logged in at the moment. >> chair peskin: okay. why don't we go to general public comment on this item. >> clerk: yes. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 187-725-3857, then press pound

and pound again. if you haven't already done so, please dial star, three to lineup to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait for the system to indicate you have been unmuted to begin your comments. i believe we have nine callers and two speakers at the moment. >> chair peskin: okay. first speaker, please. >> good morning, same supervisors, members of the rules committee in san francisco. my name is roberto vargas, and a former member of the [inaudible] had the opportunity on behalf of ucsf to convene scientists, public policy makers, and health advocates in the development of the soda tax policy and other policies to

help reduce chronic disease disparities and recently served on the s.e.d. tax. i'm calling to support dr. rosalia men dose -- mendoza and frances abigail cabrera. i know both of them to be dedicated to this work and know both of them to be dedicated to staying connected to and serving the interest of the communities that they are part of, both latinx and latinax communities that they are involved in. i also wanted to support

vanessa bohm, sorry she could not be here today. she is one of the only members that is reapplying for her seat, and i know it is a challenge for all of our members to sustain anything during the pandemic, and i deeply appreciate the fact that vanessa is willing to serve again san francisco in this capacity. she has done an amazing job in her role chairing the community input committee -- subcommittee, and i hope that she is able to continue serving san francisco and the broader community in this role. thank you for your time. >> clerk: your time has elapsed. >> chair peskin: next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors. my name is rodney chin. i'm the executive director of the [inaudible] ymca in district five, and i'm calling in to support maysha bell, who

i've worked with for the last 13 years. she is a resident of d-5, and like she had mentioned earlier, about four or five years ago, she was instrumental in aiding our community at the john muir beacon center in that community [inaudible] sugar diets and how that adversely affects our population. so again, i'm calling to support maysha bell. i think she'll be a wonderful addition to the committee. thank you. >> clerk: i believe we have at least one more caller at this time. >> chair peskin: please proceed. >> hi, there. can you hear me? >> chair peskin: we can hear you. >> great. good morning. my name is -- >> clerk: i believe you have your t.v. on in the background or computer.

i believe we're having an echo. if you could turnoff your t.v. or radio, it would be appreciated. >> okay. i don't have a t.v. or radio on. it may just be a connection. how about now? >> chair peskin: sounds good. >> okay. as i mentioned i'm [inaudible] parker, the director of the bayview-hunters point ymca. i'm calling in support of maysha bell who is a tremendous leader within our organization, not only our organization but our community. for many years, she has served our community and the organization by helping to ensure that youth and families in san francisco who have historically been marginalized or disproportionately impacted have a space and place to gain resources, to gain skills, and have access to opportunities. i believe that maysha's leadership, she is passionate and committed to the work of

supporting families in san francisco. she has demonstrated leadership in a way that has really gone beyond what, in most cases, many consider a 9-to-5 in that she goes above and beyond to provide for families. she intimately understands how food beverage impacts not only the health and wellness of youth and families in san francisco but also the cognitive abilities and learning in terms of development and achievement. i believe that her experience is well rounded from a professional perspective as well as her personal experience, and i am calling again to support her taking that seat. so i truly thank you for your time and again want to support maysha bell in this opportunity. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you. are there any other members of the public for this item?

>> operator: we have two callers in queue. >> chair peskin: please proceed. >> hi. this is cameron smith, a resident of district one. also work for the [inaudible] as the director of community programs. i was just calling to show my community support for maysha bell. throughout the years that i've been working with her, i've seen her care for the community in working to fill the equity gaps for communities of color. i believe she would be perfect for this seat, and just through her passion and her support of the community, she would be a great advocate for the city and for all the people involved, so i'll keep it nice and short, but again, my community support

for maysha. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you, sir. next speaker. >> good morning, supervisors and members of the rules committee. i am [inaudible] gardner, vice president of social services [inaudible] for the ymca of san francisco. i am calling in support of maysha bell. through her professional and community volunteer experiences, mrs. bell has the proven ability to work collaboratively through a system lens approach. mrs. bell is deeply rooted in youth and community development. she has not only advanced healthy eating and nutrition collaboratives throughout san francisco but she has also done

this nationally on behalf of many different organizations. i am putting my full support behind her application in hopes that she can further advance the work of this commission on behalf of all san franciscans. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you. are there any other members of the public for this item? >> operator: there are no more callers in queue. >> chair peskin: okay. public comment is closed, and i was remiss in not starting with some comments. if d.p.h. would like to make them, from christina get, if she's able, and i hope i pronounced her name correctly. >> good morning, supervisors. i did not actually have any prepared comments. i think you are all well prepared with respect to the work of the sugary drinks tax

advisory committee, and the only thing that i would add is i know that dr. jonathan butler is trying to get through and make public comment, but i'm not sure if that's going through. >> chair peskin: i'm happy to reopen public comment. if you have anything else to add, please feel free, and then, we -- i'll make a motion to reopen public comment if the good doctor would try to get back on. >> no, i'd just like to add that it's a great commitment, and we're very grateful to those who have been in these seats over three years and very excited to welcome new members. it sounds like there's a good crop of candidates. i'll answer any questions if you have any. >> chair peskin: thank you so much. mr. young, why don't we reopen public comment? >> clerk: operations, have we received any additional calls at this time? if you're on the line, waiting

to speak, you do need to press star, three to raise your hand to speak. we can give them a moment. >> operator: a caller just came in. >> clerk: okay. >> good morning to -- can you hear me? >> chair peskin: yes, sir. >> hi. my name is dr. jonathan butler, and i have been able to serve on the soda tax committee since the inception of the committee, and my seat was seat number five and am currently has -- have served for the past two years as cochair, and my purpose for calling is to highly recommend vanessa bohm to seat number one. she has been my colleague on the committee since day one, as

well. she has been certainly an important vote for the latino, chicana, and indigenous community, but she has been exceptionally beneficial in providing the entire committee and the community with a strong recommendation, a strong supportive community, and i just simply wanted to acknowledge that she would be most important in ensuring that the work of the committee continues, and i wanted to highly recommend her and continue in her seat, seat number one. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you so much, doctor. are there any other members of the public for this item number five? >> operator: no more callers in queue. >> chair peskin: okay. public comment is closed again. let me start by making a motion to excuse vice president supervisor mandelman.

on that motion, mr. clerk, can we have a vote. >> clerk: yes. on that motion to excuse vice president mandelman -- [roll call] . >> chair peskin: and then, supervisor chan, would you like to make some comments about ten remarkable people wanting to serve in seven seats? supervisor chan? >> commissioner chan: thank you, supervisor peskin. i think for some us wanting to pay attention to this

committee's accomplishments the last couple years, me as a mom of a public school student, a second grader in this city, really have noted some of the decisions that this committee has made in terms of funding allocation and support program and messaging really around this town, and to really support, really, in the spirits of what the sugary tax was about, so i really appreciate everyone's work here. i think that it is always great to see new members, you know or applicants that are -- that could be potentially new members to a committee, but it's also good toe zoo that there are folks or at least in this case, at least one that is incumbent that has -- that's really, you know, my preference at times is to have a mix of institutional knowledge of what

has been done and welcoming new members on board to just mix it up and with fresh perspective. so i, again, this is great to see people willingness to serve. definitely tough decision ahead of us, but i think i have some idea. i think this is really a good mix of people with perspective -- diverse perspective, so i look forward and eager to make our appointments today. thank you, chair peskin. >> chair peskin: thank you, supervisor chan, and let me just start by reminding everybody that while we have the seven seats before us today, this is actually a body that consists of 16 members, so there will be more opportunities over time as we see in the seats that are before us today.

in the seats of those that have served, six have opened up, so there will be some openings over time, and i encourage folks, all of whom are superlatively qualified, to keep an eye on this body for future vacancies and appointments. with that, i concur with supervisor chan and the doctor who just spoke, and even who, due to an emergency, vanessa bohm, was not able to speak this morning, i think she has served with distinction and would like to suggest, with residency waiver, she fill -- continue to fill seat number one and be reappointed. to seat number two, i would suggest maysha bell. to seat number 3, i would suggest marna armstead.

to seat number four, frances abigail cabrera, to seat five, [inaudible], and seat 15, laura derosier. supervisor chan, i defer to you. >> commissioner chan: chair peskin, i would love for you to repeat your appointments for seats four and five so that i understand -- i think i missed those two names -- or i think i do know those two names, but i just want to make sure i heard it correctly for seats four and five. >> chair peskin: for four, who

has to be held by an individual that is employed at a medical institution in san francisco and has experience in the diagnosis of diabetes or other diseases linked to the consumption of sugar sweetened beverages, i was suggesting francis abigail cabrera. and seat five, which has the exact same requirements as seat number four, miss diana lau. >> commissioner chan: got it. i think i understand, which is what i thought i heard. thank you, and i concur, so please do the roll call. >> clerk: chair peskin, i missed seat 16, if you do have a recommendation for that. >> chair peskin: i do have a recommendation for that, and that is maureen guerrero. >> clerk: thank you. >> chair peskin: on that motion, mr. clerk, a roll call,

please. >> clerk: yes. i'd just like to repeat to make sure i have it correct. >> chair peskin: yes. >> clerk: seat one, we have miss bohm, with a residency requirement waiver. seas two, maysha bell, seat three [inaudible] and seat 16, miss guerrero. >> chair peskin: yes, that is correct. >> clerk: on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: the motion passes with supervisor mandelman being excused. >> chair peskin: and that concludes the business before

this committee. my apologies to those who we platform, it calling by phone call star 9 to be added to the speaker line. please call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or radio. we recommend that you use zoom or telephone for public comment. thank you to sfgov tv for sharing this meeting with the public. we can start with the roll call. [roll call]

>> president bleiman: first order of business is public comment. if this is comment for any item that is not on our agenda, we'll ask if there's anybody who wishes to speak. >> clerk: there's nobody in the queue with their hand raised and there are no callers. >> president bleiman: we're going do close public comment. next agenda item is number 2, approval of our minutes january february 2, 2021 meeting. >> i move to approve. >> second.

is there any public comment? >> there are no callers in the queue. [roll call vote] in case there was any announcement regarding the health order. that's exciting to share that announcement was made today.

the thing that really matter related to expanding outdoor business activities, allowing for indoor limited capacity dining. now we're allowed to have 25% capacity inside for dining but it is limited to four people per table and one household per table.

similarly outside, there's no restriction on capacity. it is eight people and three households now instead of two. that is helpful to our world. we are going to be updating our j.a.m. transaction page. we will keep you posted. that is all good news and hopefully we can continue to get less restrictive tiers moving forward. little bit more information for all related to how we're

operating within the emergency, it's a item on our j.a.m. permit. we are continuing to turn those out. it is a little bit slower moving than it was in the beginning. we have received 222 applications since beginning of this program. right now, we have 151 active approved j.a.m. permits. there are 16 that are currently under review by staff and then there are 55 that are closed because they were ineligible or otherwise withdrawn. i wanted to update you around our retreat which we're so really excited about having? he hoped that we can meet that early on in the season. we're not quite there yet. we're waiting for federal funding to reach our

permitholders. we need to have a better sense of how much funding our venues are receiving.

>> president bleiman: any questions from the commissioners? is there any public comment on this agenda item? >> clerk: checking the queue, there's no hands raises. >> president bleiman: thank you very much. next agenda item is number 4, which is a report from deputy director azevedo. >> change of pace here for the enforcement report. previously in our last hearing, there were no updates. that changed. since our last hearing in january, we received a total of 52,000 complaints. that is number, that's different.

ly keep this head level and answer any questions. the fist business that i want to mention is a complaint that came in about gathering that was happening inside the music was playing. the inspector discovered there was the complaint was very much valid. he worked with the business owner and let him know that what was happening was not allowed under the j.a.m. permit or the health order. he mitigated the situation in realtime. the business admit their entertainment and vacated all the patrons right away. department of public health did follow up with this business and issued a closure order. they have since coming into compliance and allowed to reopen. next business that i have

flagged for you is orbit room. it has an off site j.a.m. permit. they are operating outdoor entertainment in a vacant lot that surrounded by residential units. they've received their j.a.m. permit months ago recently we saw little bit of uptick in compliments from some residential neighbors. the business owner is very eager to be in compliant. our inspector went out and worked with the business owner and helped them mitigate any sound complaints that may be generated. they are now operating within compliance of their j.a.m. permit. the business owner met with the property manager of the adjacent residential unit to resolve any problems and be the first point of contact if a neighbor does have any issues moving forward. they will contact the business owner first. they are looking good.

the next business is about neck of the woods. this business has an outdoor parklet and having a comedian perform. it's a quiet area. it's just not used to having any type of sound generated. we have received numerous complaints that the business owner is eager to be in compliant with j.a.m. permit. they have received and approved shared spaces permit. they will be getting approved j.a.m. permit this week. the business owner has already asked for and we are scheduling a sound test to ensure compliance moving forward. he's willing to take measures in order to try and decrease the sound in that quiet little

space. the next highlighted business that i like to speak about, i want to mention public works. not too much complaints about public works. i want to give a high level update to let you know that we did receive couple of complaints. there are out of compliance with their sound limit. the inspector is working with them to bring their volume down to a level that works with their j.a.m. permit and meets the needs what the business is trying to do. that is in the works right now. next highlighted business that i'm going to speak about is cafe envy. we did receive a complaint on friday the 19th which is the inspector sounded top we went to the business. there was a crowd outside.

he did not provide education. he sent video documentation. the following evening we received two more sound complaints. this is on saturday and stpd was the ones who responded to that event. department of public health issued a closure order for cafe envy. we issued a notice of violation of their j.a.m. permit. that happened, cafe envy. next up is dawn pizza. this business has been out of compliance with their j.a.m. permit and they are operating outside of their approved hours. amplify sound and entertainment can happen for six-hour period of time each day. they were issued notice of

violation originally on the 12th of february. then we received another sound complaint and we discovered that they were still operating outside of their approved j.a.m. hours. we did issue a citation for this. hopefully the business is willing to comply moving forward. i would like to bring to your attention scope davino. they have a gym permit. we have been receiving sound complaints from a neighbor. we've been receiving sound from them for a number of months.

the inspector respond to this sound complaint over the weekend. he took a sound measurement in realtime and the band was in compliance with their j.a.m. permit. there are no violations of the j.a.m. permit observed at that time. i think it's important to briefly set the stage or paint the picture of what is occurring in this situation. letting know that scope of davino's owner has been very willing and eager to comply with the j.a.m. permit condition amaking concession to try to mitigate concerns of the neighbors or the neighbor about the problem that's being expressed. the owner has been making concessions. they have rearranged the location where the band perform. they are conscientious of their

time. they log their own sound limit. they have their own sound meter. they are monitoring their sound levels. i think it's important to note that the neighbor does have wishes may not be able to be accommodated as far as what j.a.m. permit allows. six hours of amplified entertainment everyday of the week. scope davino doesn't have that. they are utilizing up to six days. there was a gap in the health order which allowed entertainment to occur prior to j.a.m. permit existing. the neighbor has expressed concerns that scopea davino was out of compliance. we didn't have a permit in place to manage -- search the j.a.m.

permit was allowed to be applied for, they try to come in compliance. if you have questions, we can talk about that. i wanted to brief you on this situation and let you know that's something that we are working on as easy stuff. last business that i like to mention is curio, they are being creative in their outdoor programming and looking really cool. we did get a sound complaint about their show last week. we will be working with them moving forward. that might be on the docket. that's all that i have. i know it's a lot of information and i'm happy to answer any questions if there are any.

>> when you get the j.a.m. permit, do you send is sound limit right away or is it determined? >> good question. with the j.a.m. permit right now the standard language and this is very much subject to change, the standard language is that the business is to be at ambient sound level from 50 feet away. there's a lot of variables. it might be less than 50 feet or if there's no neighbors around, it could be much further than 5. that's just a general sound limit that we're giving. >> it's like the majority of j.a.m. permits have that limit. it's not until we start getting complaints that we figure out what the bigger scenario might be. for context, pre-covid, what's

listed in code around outdoor amplified sound is limited so it doesn't exceed ambient at 250 feet. so much farther. just for perspective, 50 feet is like a cross -- if you have your speakers here and it should be at ambient from across the street on a regular side street. >> basically, until you get a complaint, that's when you set a limit for them? >> potentially more specific one either with like db level or we're saying you can go up to -- for example, the midway. they don't have neighbors there. for example, the chapel or curio kaitlyn mentioned. they want to start having live

entertainment performances where there's an actual band four times a month. we're looking into conditioning that permit administratively with louder sound limit for those special events to accommodate it. it's kind of a dance. you have to figure out what works between the permitholder and the neighbor. i think kaitlyn and the inspectors are doing a fabulous job. >> president bleiman: it seems to be quite a bit of work. i'm just hoping in the future we get to keep this thing. i'm going even after covid. i'm just wondering -- i guess it will evolve as it comes. >> we'll have updates for you in forthcoming meetings about shared spaces pain where that's going and how we plug in.

you'll learn more. there are things that are happening. we are discussing how we can potentially move forward. >> president bleiman: okay, thank you. good job. any more questions? i have questions about scopedavino, can you remind me how many time times we've gone out to visit? >> this year we've been once. the complaints -- the responses we were making were pre-december shutdown. i would say about probably three to five times that we were out there and witnessed in compliance. >> every single time they've

been in compliance? >> correct. >> president bleiman: we have a limited amount of resources in lot of places. at what point we'll find somebody in compliance over and over again? do we have a official policy on that? >> we don't. it's challenging. it's been case-by-case. there's been issues with precovid where this is the case. you visit numerous times and you're able to prove that the venue is in compliance but there's still mediation problems. at some point you may hear from a neighbor at a hearing.

we go out three times in a row for complaints. they're in compliance but there's sound limit each time. you tend to scale it back. but that doesn't mean you're not going to hear from the other party involved. >> that make sense. i wondered if -- it sound like they're in compliance. i wonder if -- i'm sure you're in communication with that finished. -- neighborhood. personally, i edon't want to speak for commissioner falzon. we had issues like this before. from a police standpoint after a few calls that result in

nothing. they divert the resources elsewhere. i like to see our resources used in places that need it because there's so much going on in the city now. i want to go on the record saying after five visits within compliance responding to a complaint as far as i'm concerned, there's much better use of that. >> it's also just beyond that. if we brief you as a commission and you believe -- if you want to bring a certain permit to hearing regardless of compliance, you have the ability to do that with these j.a.m. permits just as a reminder. you have the ability to call upon me to bring a permit in for potential reconditioning. we really try to handle things with mediation. this neighbor has expressed they don't like the level of the sound. they don't like the bands that

are playing and it's the same three bands that play. they don't like the frequency. the j.a.m. permit allows for seven days a week s. hours a day. they maybe using it six days a week, 36 hours a week. that's the only place i could see potential reconditioning if that's what the commission wanted. we're trying to maximize business ability to offer entertainment during the emergency. >> just to clarify on the j.a.m. permit, they are eligible for six days a week but only in three-hour increments per day. they're not utilizing the full six-hour time frame. that's allowable under the permit. it's just for three hours a day everyday but monday. >> from 6:00 to 10:00 p.m. >> it's tuesday through thursday

5:00 to 8:00, friday 6:00 to 9:00, saturday and sunday 4:00 to 7:00. >> okay. i'm going to leave my opinions at the door. [laughter] >> it's not an agenda item. sounds like they're in compliance to me. >> you can absolutely discuss it in the realm of enforcement though. >> sound like they're in compliance for me. businesses are struggling for their lives now. three hours a day small price to pay to help a business survive. that's my personal view. any other questions? is there any public comment on the deputy director's report?

>> clerk: i'm checking the chat. there's nobody with their hands raised. >> president bleiman: thank you very much deputy director. next agenda item is number 5, which is update on the city's economy from ted egan. the chief economist with the office of the controller. >> good evening commissioners.

it's my pleasure. i'm going to try to share my screen. i have a brief presentation on the current state of the city's economy. i'm going to cover the items that i think interest to this commission for which we have data. i know that's less than the number of things you wish to ask about. feel free to ask me anything you want. i may tell you we don't have the data. i do want to walk through about the current state of the city's economy and in particular, your industry. if that's coming through, i want to start with our highest level indicator how the city labor market is doing. weapon only have data through

december of last year. there's a bit of delay in 2021. we'll get january data soon. the data shown is we had huge drop in jobs. roughly half of those jobs were back as of december. the regional unemployment rate went from 2% to north of 12%. it went down for most of the months following april. there was an uptick in december as well as a drop in jobs in december associated with the second wave. i would expect january numbers come in, we will see job growth again. i think we're going to continue to see job growth until the end of the pandemic.

one of the major features of the shock in terms of the structure city's economy is how it affects high wage versus low wage workers. the blue line is the professional services sector, one of the largest sectors in the city. its monthly job total is percentage of where it was last january before the pandemic. as you can see, it experienced a fairly mild drop of about 5% by december 2020 that industry completely recovered. the restaurant sector lost about 70% of the jobs in april and had only recovered to about 60% of the pre-recession total. which means 40% of the jobs in the restaurant were still lost

as of december. this is the city industry that's most sensitive to changes in the public health control. in october, when there was a reopening, there's 6000 jobs added in that sector. they were lost again more than that were lost by december. we have a limited ability to look at industry detail within the entertainment and nightlife sector. essentially we got two sources of employment data. one of which comes out every month. it's for two counties and doesn't have lot of industry detail. the one that has lot of industry detail for san francisco, we don't have data on that yet. this is what we have that's current. the blue line here, this whole sector is called arts entertainment and recreation. the part that's most relevant is performing arts and venues.

that sector has not seen recovery at all. unemployment there is still down more than 60% from the pre-pandemic period. other major elements of nightlife are obviously restaurant businesses. we have detail on that. as i mentioned before, both full service and limited service. eating places have seen some recovery but that recovery lags into end of the year given the increase to covid case load that we saw and the additional shutdown at the end of the year. i want to take a step back and provide some more city wide economic context. the pandemic is a global phenomenon every city in the country suffered economic shock because of covid. san francisco economy done worse than other cities. one of the reasons is that san francisco residents are staying

home. there's data from people cell phones from global mobility that shows how much people are spending out the home compared to 2019. it shows that san francisco more than any other city, people are staying home. you're not out shopping and you're not out at the venues and doing other things outside. there's bigger economic visit there associated with taking the public health guidance seriously. many hotel occupancy is down. we've lost -- office workers are staying home. the downtown sales tax data showing loss about 70% year over year. not much recovery there. this issue that i'm raising on

this slide is something that's san francisco specific. that is health migration. there's been a number of journalist made clear that information act request to the post office to find out how many people are moving in and out of san francisco. this is the story from couple of weeks ago. at least 35,000 more people have moved out of san francisco in 2020 compared to 2019. it's not a number of people moving in that's left, it's the number of people moving out. we clearly seen little bit of an emptying of the city. i think these numbers could be on the low side. we could be -- we could have lost 5% to 10% of the city population. right there, in addition to all the other factors in consumer spending, we have a smaller population than we had at the start of the pandemic. this is also showing up in

apartment rents. san francisco seeing biggest drop in apartment rent that's tracked by the major rent brokers. this is data from apartment list. the good news, i guess, by january and now we have february in hand, we're starting to see little bit of recovery. february had a small increase over january. january is left over from december. we may have hit bottom in the apartment market and then that is going to be very closely tied to the migration data. when we get more migration data, we'll see people stopped moving around end of the year and now the question is, how long until we see a recovery? we have some additional data on small business closure rate. this is additional data from the opportunity incites through the harvard.

it's coming from a credit card processor or payment processor. they're looking at the number of businesses who aren't making payments, registering electronic payments compared to the year before. this is done across the country. san francisco is again relatively worse than other cities. at least in the hospitality business, is worse than others and not really showing sign of recovery. still down around two thirds of businesses not open or not making payment compared to the pre-pandemic period. i wanted to end with a positive story. the forecast of covid case load for the state of california from institute for health metrics at

the university of washington, forecasting throughout the pandemic. they are basically showing that in california, the hospitalizations are down. that's known by the public health people. in combination of effective of the vaccine stopping the spread of the virus and increasing number of people getting vaccinated, it's reasonable for us to start forecasting the next recovery in the second half. i feel much more confident about saying that now than i have than any other period in the pandemic

period. let me just close with some thoughts and may be outlook for the entertainment and nightlife industries in the city. the city's economy performed worse than other large cities in the united states over the past year. that's a question -- that's a matter of public health restrictions, out migration, we rely on tourists and we rely on office workers. until office workers and hotel guests return, we're likely to see an elevated unemployment rate in the city. we've seen extremely high levels of office tenants and big tech

companies, putting their office space on the sublease market and not lot of takers that the point. what that means is, we're going to have fewer people in downtown than we are used to having pre-pandemic. even though the city is giving all clear. this is recipe for slow recovery. businesses have walked away from significant leases. i do think that part of the reopening san francisco broadly and recovery of the city's economy broadly hinges around perceptions of quality of life and things to do in san

francisco and amenities in san francisco in which entertainment businesses are vital. i do think that one of the things to push people out of the city in the past year is the fact that everything is closed. when things are open and there are things to do in san francisco, that will get the ball rolling in a positive direction and will give people and workers and ultimately tourists a reason to come back to the city. i think, however, we will not see full recovery until we see recovery from the offices and hotels. let me stop there and i'll be happy to take any questions. >> president bleiman: mr. egan, is there online?

is this already published? >> it's not online now this particular version. i shared it with dylan and you're welcome to post it. >> president bleiman: dylan, i guess you send the link. i lot to get a copy. i have an upcoming meeting with another group about the congestion of soma. i like to use it as data. before the pandemic, there was a major congestion. i don't think we have to worry about this. especially after listening to this report. in your opinion, i guess when we have this recovery, how long do you think it would take us to really get back to the way it was? as long as it's your opinion. >> i will give you both of mine.

i think people -- maybe we're not going to come back to downtown or maybe we're going to think about works from home permanenting, when you walk away office leases, there's going to be reset in the office market. the office owners want those buildings still. there's going to be a market incentive to find tenants. what we saw end of the dot-com crash, it took a long time. just because the dot-com went away, it didn't mean bunch of other industries wanted to come to san francisco. it's still expensive.

we had much slower recovery since the early 2000 recession. i think there are many tail winds for the tech industry as a whole. i'll mention couple of things. we've seen more venture capital in san francisco during the three quarters of the pandemic than we saw the three quarters before the pandemic. entrepreneurs in san francisco, they're getting funded at rates during the pandemic that are higher than they were before the pandemic. people are still working from home, that's a vote of confidence from investors in san francisco tech.

we're seeing hiring by the tech companies in san francisco back to pre-pandemic levels. now they're working from home. they're not shifting that hiring to their office. on this migration issue, there's a lot of speculation, well, everybody is moving out of california. they don't like the taxes or whatever. that appears not to be the case. people are moving at a higher rate, they are moving to places where they move out of san

francisco to like nearby suburb counties, like sacramento or l.a. i do think that a lot of people are going to look at the rents which are down over 25% in san francisco. that can come back pretty fast. that can be people saying, i'm never going to get another chance on a rent controlled apartment in san francisco. rent stability does a lot for people. i wouldn't be surprised if we saw brightness in the apartment market in the spring. at which point, the whole issue is, you're back in san francisco so you're not living wherever you are.

i do think it will take some time to absorb the office space. it can take a few years. i don't think the fundamental competitiveness of the city has changed p.p.p. it wouldn't surprise me to see a pre-pandemic economy back by 2024 or 2025. >> president bleiman: i think you're kind of on the mark for that. when i was set up by my first club in sumter market in 1999, there was that big boom. it only lasted for a year or two and then it was dead for so long. but it came back. i guess the city leaders will have to kind of bring some more incentives again. like you said, we are better in

the tech sector. those of us who did invest in stock market and things like that, that's why the investments are coming back because there's deals now. i think it's not done. i know it will take time. we can't lose our entertainment and nightlife venues. it's very important for recovery. i hope there's still that fun for supervisor haney's to help these venues to continue. looks like there's a light at the end of the tunnel. we're getting excited. this third round of outdoor dining and indoor partial is really helping the spirits come back. i'm hoping it's three years.

>> one of the questions they asked, are you closed now and they ask are you planning to close permanently. at any given moment, during this pandemic, more than 40% or 50% of small businesses san francisco are closed. the number of businesses saying they are closing permanently is 5% less than 10%. that's true in san francisco than it is nationally. for businesses that are forced to close, some sort of hibernation is in order. you're looking for a vote of confidence to say i think people will come back. i think that this is a real business again once i'm allowed to reopen.

>> lot of the restaurants are just taking a break. i heard the buzz some of the star chefs. they are bored. we got to do our part to keep them motivated and give little bit more incentive. people will come back. >> any other questions from commissioners? >> thank you so much for that thoughtful analysis. for me the most troubling aspect is the out-migration. so many other small businesses depend on consumers. i wanted to know what you thought we can do in our limited capacity to help with the

recovery. >> no one really knows about the out-migration. i think it's good news that most people move to the suburbs. if you're living with three roommates who you're not related to and you're worried about -- [indiscernible] that's a reason to move away. i think reemphasizing the message of safety, reemphasizing the message of reopening and just reminding people about san francisco, it's going to be the right time for that. it's going to be true for residents as well as for tourists. >> that's great to hear. entertainment will be the draw for bringing back some of that migration, to have a culturally

flourishing city. thank you. >> president bleiman: anyone else have questions? >> when all the tech people moved out, do you think that people will move into the city who are really into live music again into rock and roll and going out? >> i'm just joking sort of. it's a good question. san francisco obviously, has benefited traditionally from waves of young people moving in the city for no particular economic reason. there are times when that's hard and there are times when that's easier.

this is one of those times. like i was suggesting before, i do think there could be a gold rush mentality about san francisco apartments in 2021. i don't know who's going to feel motivated to move to san francisco. people starting a band and san francisco feels like an affordable and more relaxed place at the moment compare to other places. we can have another moment for that cultural. i can see that happening. >> what's what i'm hoping. i was talking with bar owners, we were talking about how after the crash in 2008, even in 2003, 2004 and 2005 and in 2010, there's so many people who worked in service in the city. your entire staff lived in the city. they go out a lot and they spend

a lot of money at restaurants and bars and nightlife then slowly they got priced out to the point where i had hundred something staff and fewer half of them were able to actually live in the city. they were commuting. it was a different scene. it will be interesting to see. >> we have seen during the 2010 sort of movement of low wage workers who work in san francisco to live there. it doesn't look like low-wage workers moving out the city. the people who have their jobs,

the tech workers seem to be the ones leaving. obviously there are eviction moratoriums for folks who own their homes. there are mortgage forbearance programs. those keep getting rolled back. the good news is, people are keeping current on their debt. their rent debt. lot of low-wage workers are struggling to pay the rent. they are liquidating their savings. when the public health emergency is over and if the federal government draws the line in the stimulus and says it's time for eviction moratorium to end and start talking about a payment plan and that money is there for people. then you may start to see people saying, despite that san francisco rents are down 25%, i can't afford my place anymore. i'm worried about that. frankly, the service workers who

live in san francisco, many of them can't afford an apartment. they really need to have income security around the place that they live now. if you still have elevated unemployment at restaurants and other low-wage industries, it's going to be difficult. i have concerns about that as much as i get the point that big rent reduction opens the door to new people moving in the city. >> any further questions? i'm going to open this up to public comment. >> clerk: there are no hands raised. >> president bleiman: we want to thank you so much for such a thoughtful presentation. it was really helpful. strangely helpful.

fantastic. >> i think this is going to be the worse presentation i will share with you for a long time. >> president bleiman: thank you again for joining us. >> thank you. >> his slides are in the shared fouledder -- folder for you. >> all right everyone. >> president bleiman: the next agenda item is number 6. update on nightlife business assistance in response to covid-19. the legendary ben van houten. >> thank you.

i truly do not deserve that level of introduction. dylan, you're going to bring up the slide deck? >> yes, let me do that. >> i have a short update on some of the federal state, local efforts that are ongoing and obviously happy to to field any questions. i wanted to start out with status updates. the governor signed legislative package that provides a number of different release measures including several for small businesses. first off on the california small business covid-19 relief grant program, that's the program grants up to $25,000 for small businesses impacted by the pandemic. application windows were in

january and february and application period closed, there was significant amount of uncertainty among businesses about whether they were going to receive these grants and lot of folks got wait listed. the good news is that there has been $500 million allocated to that program and the new legislative package that the governor signed provides $2 billion for that relief grant program. there's some optimism that businesses who have not heard anything recently about their relief grant application that hopefully, those folks will get some relief through the additional money being provided. traditionally, the governor announced fee waivers for restaurant and bars for their liquor licenses. two years for liquor license businesses. the way that will work

operationally has been after businesses receive their renewal notices, qualifying business can apply for a waiver with a.b.c. there's an f.a.q. page on the a.b.c. website. jumping on to the next slide. in addition to financial relief, there's really flurry of legislations happening now, beginning of the 2021 california legislative session. i highlighted two bills here that have been introduced. there are a number of bills that touch on nightlife, entertainment, outdoor activities, outdoor dining, there's a lot of ideas out there. this is not meant to suggest there are only twos but to highlight two that are on our

radar. sb314 from sandra weiner does a lot. including establishing a permit program for a.b.c. so that businesses can continue to do alcohol service that they've been doing through the emergency relief. great to see that being proposed to be permanent. additionally, 314 will create new type of liquor license for entertainment venues especially in place like san francisco where we have a hard cap on restaurant and bar licenses. that's an exciting piece of the proposal. additionally the bill would

adopt open consumption areas on public streets if they chose to do so under the terms that localities could adopt there. there are a number of different reforms and really innovative ideas to help businesses share premises or share a common consumption area also some reforms around the liquor license application process. sb389 from senator dodd. enables restaurants to continue sebbing to go alcohol beverages. as carbon drafted, it would enable restaurants to continue to serve to go alcohol and would allow to go mixed drink, cocktails with meal service.

i highlighted here would not extend to bars. that's something i'm sure the bar community is already thinking about and i think it will be an important piece of extending that relief beyond as the pandemic continues and hopefully after it is done. next local relief efforts, update here i think it was couple of days after the last commission hearing i presented at. the mayor announced a commitment to allocate $1.5 million of the previously announced relief grant money for entertainment venues. our office o.w.d. is working hard to get a relief grant program up and running to get that money appropriated and to make that happen.

in that process, there will be grant funding specifically for entertainment venues. more to come on that. the second box is about the venue recovery fund. that legislation was approved by the board of supervisors last week. there doing that in consultation with our office with the entertainment commission and industry stakeholders. there's forward momentum on the recovery fund. i'm sure more news in the future. finally, part update. this is the federal grant

program that our entertainment industry worked really hard to advocate for. it's really has become all the more desperately needed in the months since the federal relief legislation was adopted end of december. there's no new information on when an application will be posted, what the application timeline will be like. i saw headline that some members of congress have reached out to the s.b.a. expressing concern about the time it's taking to get that program off the ground.

these are core steps businesses can take now. really most importantly is to register with the federal government system for award management. which is a process that can, according to the s.b.a. take up to couple of weeks. really making sure that a business registered for that system in the business need dunn and bradstreet number. if they have one, they can request a dunn and bradstreet. in addition, business should be regularly check the frequently asked questions document. it can help inform people about where the program is heading. finally to gather any documents that will be needed in order to apply for a grant. documents showing number of employees that your business or had, showing the extent of the revenue loss, diagrams maybe

needed to see if you meet all the requirements being an entertainment venue. lot of this is mapped out on s.b.a.'s page. there are steps that businesses can take now. they should check out our oewd relief page. there's going to be preactive applications. given in part urgency of the

need and also i think industry members concerns that they are even $15 billion is not going to be enough for the scope of the need that's out there. i think that's the end of the slides. only other thing i would add is that the federally relief package currently being discussed in congress, has at present, a relief program of grants for restaurants and bars. there was a piece of legislation last year. the restaurant act that was as introduced this year.

with that, i will stop talking and open for any questions, thoughts to assist. >> president bleiman: anybody have any questions? >> good report. do you know anybody that really got the grants? the state grants that we first applied for? have you heard of anybody getting those? >> i have heard of businesses getting the grant. i don't want to go off anecdotal. given the massive expansion of the funding, to wait and see about in terms of having any sort of final conclusions about where the money is going. i do know that lot of folks have been very frustrated by the lack of communication, or limited communication on that program.

which, i think, on some level, it's unprecedented effort for the state to -- given number of businesses and number of sectors that have been impacted by the pandemic. >> the communication is better. we get an updated e-mail saying it's still on the wait list. i'm just curious. we got to be patient. >> yeah, i think so. >> president bleiman: questions? commissioner lee, i got one of the california grants. >> commissioner lee: you're one of the lucky ones. >> president bleiman: it was about 70 in our bar group that applied. i think two of us got it.

>> commissioner lee: two out of 70. >> president bleiman: thank you ben. that was a good report. my question -- if i want to share this information with others -- i know said there's lot of places to go, is the slide show available? >> i don't know that it's posted anywhere. you're welcome to send it around. >> president bleiman: i love to. i think this is really helpful. >> clerk: i will post it. >> president bleiman: cool. thank you very much. appreciate it. looks we have some something to look forward to. is there any public comment on this agenda item?

>> clerk: standby. there's nobody in the queue with their hand raised and no phone calls. >> president bleiman: thank you very much, ben. see you soon. we are getting to the final agenda item tonight. which is number 7. commissioner comments and questions/new business request for future agenda items. what you got everyone? >> commissioner lee: my only comment is based on these two reports. the industry got to figure it out for themselves. you can apply for all these grants and everything but in the meantime, just do what you got to do to survive out there. whatever you guys can do.

funding will come. who knows. we might all get vaccinated by then. >> president bleiman: other agenda items we like to see in the future? >> you have a reminder right? >> i want to remind -- [indiscernible]

>> commissioner lee: every year we have to do the sunshine training? >> every year, commissioner. [laughter] >> president bleiman: just pick the most restrictive option. it's always that one. any other comments? that's it for me. i don't have anything specifically. we are going to keep our eye on save the stages act because it will be nice to know how

everybody is doing given the grants that they may or may not be producing. is there any public comment on this agenda item? >> clerk: there's nobody in there with hand raised and no call. >> president bleiman: all right. we'll close public comment. i will go ahead and adjourn this meeting at 6:47 p.m. thank you very much everyone. see you in couple of weeks.

>> van ness avenue runs from market street to bay street in san francisco. south vanness runs from south of market to cesar chavez street. originally residential after the 1906 earthquake it was used as a fire break. many car dealerships and businesses exist on vanness today with expansion of bus lanes. originally marlet street was named after james vanness, seventh mayor of san francisco from 1855 to 1856. vanness heavy are streets in santa cruz, los angeles and fresno in his honor. in 1915 streetcars started the opening of the expo. in 1950s it was removed and

replaced by a tree-lined median. it was part of the central freeway from bayshore to hayes valley. it is part of uses 101. it was damaged during the 1989 earthquake. in 1992 the elevator part of the roadway was removed. it was developed into a surface boulevard. today the vanness bus rapid transit project is to have designated bus lanes service from mission. it will display the history of the city. van ness avenue.