>> a proud supporter of proposition "i" and the housing stabilization fund, and it would be an honor to serve on this committee. we represent 22 affordable housing developers and advocates, most of whom are based & grew out of the struggles of color in san francisco, and particular communities to find stable and dignified housing. collectively, our members are responsible for over 30,000 units of permanently affordable housing here in san francisco. chuchu mission is to support housing under community control, from non-profits to co-ops to

other models that might be evolving. i bring skills as a licensed architect, and formerly working for an affordable housing developer. for the last three or five years, chuchu has been developing new ways of expanding our affordable housing system. i look forward to working with you to see what is our next step to stopping displacement and housing future generations of san franciscans. thank you very much for the honor to be presented before this committee. >> chairman: thank you, mr. marti, and i understand that remhi menalic is now available. so why don't we go back to remhi.

remhi, i know you just called in, but we called on you to speak before you logged in. >> hi, my name is remhi. and i'm born and raised in san francisco, in the filmore district, and i'm happy to be here. >> chairman: okay. does that conclude your comments? >> yes. >> chairman: all right. why don't we go on to john borenski for seat six -- five or six. >> good morning, chair

peskin and supervisors. i interested on serving on one of the academic seats on the housing stability fund oversights advisory board. if appointed, i would work with others on the board and others in the city to make sure we have a sustainable affordable housing, with as many housing units as possible. the ideally, the program is serves as a model for other cities in california and the nation. i believe i am qualified for several reasons, my book documents the history of housing in the city, with an emphasis on public housing, what went right, what didn't go right, from the 1930s through the 21st century. i lived and worked in san francisco in the 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s, moments when housing costs went up dramatically, and i know how housing ability or lack of ability impacted the city. and i've served on

numerous city boards and task forces that focused on improving the rights and opportunities of workers, immigrants, tenants, and the poor, and ending gender-based violence and inequality. it would be an honor to serve on this board. thank you for your consideration. >> chairman: thank you. seeing no comments or questions from committee members, let's go ton to jon mingho. >> thank you forgiving me the opportunity speak. i'm a gay malaysian immigrant. i was born and raised in malaysia and grew up in public housing. growing up in a country

where being gay is illegal, the public housing compound was a safe space, and a place where i could play with neighbors, where low income families such as mine lived. a decade later, when i moved to san francisco, i was living in chinatown and saw the crowded conditions in which my neighbors lived in, and wondered why my family in malaysia had more living space than my neighbors. i was trying to answer these questions. in my time in work in affordable housing, i worked on 20 low-income housing projects with local municipalities and developers of color among rural towns and cities struggling with displacement. i committed to using a racial equity lens to projects that support affordable housing developers. i have experience in affordable housing.

if appointed, i'm committed to using an economic equity lens to help the board stretch its funds for maximize affordable units with an eye to the lower income bracket, especially below 50% a.m.i., as well as communities that have disproportionately felt the brunt of displacement, including communities of color and low-income immigrant communities. i have worked on housing that pushed sus staicialtd susty to green buildings, and if appointed, i hope to optimize the affordability of new housing with new energy retrofits. i'm grateful to the immigrant leaders on prop "c" so citizens like me can apply to serve on the commission. i'm committed to use my expertise in the affordable housing finance and development, and my lived experience for

marginalized communities, and use my perspective as a non-citizen for the housing board. it would be an honor for me to be able to serve on this board. thank you. >> chairman: thank you, mr. ho. and with that, why don't we move on to chante zing. >> good morning, supervisors. i'm good? all right. my name is chante zing. i'm a district city renter and have been organizing around tenant rights and land use in san francisco for the past fewer to five years. four or five years. i sit on the board of the san francisco community land trust, and i have co-founded past efforts, such as the housing committee for the democratic (indiscernable) among others. as well as ya bay area rest in peace. i've developed an understanding of the critical understanding

between tenant organizing. i have been advocating for social and public housing locally, statewide, and nationally for a while now, including brainstorming through recent public land proposals with mr. lance burg and mr. parlon. and i hope to bring my experience to bear on the oversight board in order to avoid repeating mistakes of the past and develop groundbreaking social housing programs. i think we need to create tenant power and accountability to marginalized communities from day one. i will prioritize outreach especially to black, latinx community organizers and renters and homeowners in marginalized san francisco communities in order to build an innovative social housing model that centers on their needs and builds on the organizing, the successes, and the failures of the past. as my day job concerns

particularly the policy implementation of state and local pandemic rent relief, i think i'm well-poised to handle the just and equity distribution of prop "i" to the san franciscans. thank you for your consideration. >> chairman: thank you, ms. zing. our next speaker is alex landsburg. mr. landsburg? >> sorry. am i unmuted now? >> chairman: you are. >> thank you, everybody. my apologies for that. thank you, chair peskin and members of the rules committee and supervisor peskin for supporting my nomination. some brief introduction. my name is alex landsburg, and i'm the research and

advocacy for the electrical construction industry. beginning with my work on the proposition "l" back in 2003. since earning my master's in city planning, i've been organizing work at the intersection of land use, labor, equity in both san francisco and throughout the bay area and statewide. i moved to the neighborhood while organizing environmental justice compaigns to shut down the hunter's point power plant, the shipyard, and to upgrade the sewage treatment plan. i see firsthand about the importance of stable housing for people, and regardless of their income, as well as the centrality of the programs. during the days, i represent those who not

just use affordable housing at times, but those who build it, both the contractors, as well as the workers. because i think it is really important as we move forward in envisioning what a more expansive affordability housing universe looks like, that we keep in mind the men and women who actually make this possible. i am absolutely excited to be joining all of these incredible other folks on this committee, and look forward to serving the city and really making this decision come alive. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. seeing no questions from committee members, let's go to the next member. calvin quick. >> good morning. my name is calvin quick. i'm applying for an at-large seat on the oversight board. thank you for the opportunity to speak this morning. i have served the past two and a half years on the san francisco youth commission as district 5 representative tiff and

legislative affairs committee, mandated by the charter. prior to my time on the youth commission, i was the legislative director for bay area student activists, an entirely student advocacy. one of the issues i have worked on the most at the youth commission has been affordable and supportive housing, specifically for youth exiting homelessness. the city is already years behind on its commitment to build affordable and supportive housing for the people who need stability most, and we need to build on the opportunity we have with the passage of props "i" and "k" to think transformatively to think about how the city can transform to social housing, and the purpose is to stabilize housing from market fluctuations, whether that be the community land trusts or

investing in municipal, mixed-income housing. we also need to make sure when we're talking about how to spend prop "i" funding, we're talking to the communities that have been hardest hit by the housing crisis. the oversight board must be that interface and dialogue enabler between communities and constituents, youth, low income families, communities of color, that are often ignored at city hall and city departments. this has been my role and goal d deep personal commitment during my three terms, which i believe makes me well-placed to continue that work on the oversight board. one last point: we need more youth on the commission. we're not just the future of the city, as many politicians very rightly say; we also live here, just as much as anyone. so whether on this board or any other boards, i strongly urge the committee to bear that in

mind. thank you for your consideration. >> chairman: thank you. why don't we move on to davita escaveda. and mr. marti, if you can turn your camera off. >> good morning,s supervisions. my name is davita escaveda. i work at the camp coordinator for jobs for justice. we're a coalition of local unions and local centers, and working between labor and community. when i say "labor," i mean not just unions, but worker centers. i think the full picture is really important here, especially as we're talking about affordable housing for our working families. the work i primarily do is jobs for justice housing work. [inaudible] i would bring that perspective and experience moving forward, from

allied unions and workers' centers as fighting for the many working families in san francisco. the workers and laborers that the city relies on, and making sure they continue to have a place in this city, and they have greater control over their futures. on top of the work i do with jobs for justice, i also have my own knowledge of housing policy. i do have a master's in community and regional planning, where i primaryly studied genttrification, and i want to make clear the importance of having a diverse worker board, a worker perspective that includes worker centers, and i believe my role at jobs for justice will represent those perspectives on this board for the working families in this city. i would be honored to

serve on this board and thank you for your consideration. >> chairman: thank you very much. why don't we go on to lox vosich. >> good morning. for the past four years, i've been advocating for municipal social housing in san francisco. i played a significant role in passing props "i" and "k" last year to make municipal housing for al a reality. prior to that, i work on (indiscernable) which spelled out what public housing could look like. supervisors, i think it is important that prop "k," which passed with 73.5% of the vote, does not remain

an unfulfilled promise. the vast majority of s.f. voters approved, and i am ready to do everything that i can if i'm appointed to bring together the board of supervisors and the mayor's office around implementing a pilot program for prop "k" municipal housing. and i want to make sure that san francisco's munic municipal housing is the best housing we can imagine because i think that is what we should aspire to. given the change in my application seat, i want to highlight some of the work i've done with tenants. i organized with mid-town tenants who were on rent strike. i have volunteered with passing tenant right to council, when we were signature gathering for prop "f," to advocating for it on the ballot. and a lot of that involved meeting with public housing tenants and very clearly hearing about the issues of work orders and

the warrant of habit ability not being met adequately. a lot of that was due to the san francisco housing authority being underresourced from the beginning. i think work order requirements for public housing should be codified more strongly in statutes. there are other things i've been involved in to ensure rent control at the state level. i'm happy to take any questions, if there are any, especially given there was a last-minute change in the seat. thank you for considering me. i'm also supporting a lot of other folks applying here, some include chante zing, and davita escaveda. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. seeing no questions from members, why don't we go on to the last on the list before us. >> good morning,

supervisors. i'm applying for seats 10 and 11 on the mousing housing oversight board. i've been a resident for over 10 years. i, too, helped shaped the november 2020proposition "k" with my one-time partner in crime, among others. and subsequently worked on the compaigns of propositions "i" and "k" to fund municipal housing for all people. i worked on pilot measures for mutual housing for all in 2018. and i met with many community groups and advocates throughout the city to incorporate their proposals, and i worked with public housing in the u.s.a. just this past month, sunnydale residents received notice, forcing them to move out to

privatized units. the housing crisis here in san francisco is driven in part by the continued privatization of our existing public land and housing, and the lack of housing guarantee. it would start the long process of pushing back against both of those shameful trends. there are many ways of providing stable, affordable housing in the long-term, and municipal housing must be one of them. and i've been an active member in my community in the city at large. i ran for the s.f. pride board of supervisors in 2018. i have given my time to various pop-up covid sites, and the vaccination site at 24th street, which is operating rights right now. and i'm a current member of the san francisco civil grand jury 2020/2021term. i believe my experience demonstrates my

willingness to spend my time helping to solve san francisco's biggest problems, and helping to make sure that everybody can call san francisco their home. i'm also supporting chante zing and davita escaveda for seats. and i would be thrilled if any of us could serve on this board. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. i just want to make sure that we have not missed anybody. if there are any applicants who we have not heard from who would like to speak, this is your opportunity. i think we've gotten everybody, except for the one individual who was not able to attend. bernita burnes, who is unable to attend. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on item three. >> at this time, we have approximately 35 listeners and four people in line to speak. members of the public who wish to provide public comment should call

415-655-0001, the meeting i.d. 1875577823. then press ##. if you haven't already done so, please dial *3 to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you've been unmuted and you may begin your comments. may we have the first speaker, please. >> chairman: first speaker? >> clerk: okay. that speaker was not available. can we move on to the next speaker, please?

>> caller: good morning, this is theresa flandrick, and i'm calling about seat number seven. i am concerned with this switch in that i would really like to see someone who has been anchored in the san franciscan community for a long time, anchored well in terms of decades of being a long-term tenant, also. and having a depth of knowledge that is more intimate, rather than an outsider looking in. what i'm also noticing is the lack of someone who is a senior on this board, which would also speak well and be a nice balance in terms of also having youth represented on this board. so those are high comments. and i do hope that you'll consider those. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. next speaker, please.

>> caller: this is josephine speaking to support hanz. hanz is uniquely qualified as an at-risk young man, being an undocumented immigrant, and has been living in chinatown for a couple of years. he understands the hardships and struggles of living in s.r.o.s, and he is probably the only chinese and south asian candidate to run for any of the seats. he would represent a unique experience of the nearly 40% of population in san francisco, and most of them are low income and have lived in s.r.o.s.

he will bring a unique experience and perspective to guide how do we make the lives of our s.r.o.s residents, mostly in chinatown, to a better level. he is a proponent to appoint non-citizens to the boards. and i think this is a perfect opportunity for him and the representation of the greater chinese, asian, as well as general communities. thank you very much. >> chairman: thank you. next speaker. >> caller: hello. good morning. my name is bayer fong, members, raphael mandelman mand and connie chan.

we support the application of hanz ho, the san francisco housing stability fund oversight board for seats six and 11. mr. ho has had over four years of experience in affordable housing, non-profit leadership, and civic engagement. he is uniquely qualified in affordable housing financing, and experience in d.m.r., hudd, fair housing law, low income housing tax credit, historical tax credit, renewable construction, renewable energy, and design and l.e.d. he supports ethical investing, sustainability, housing and community development, as well as lgbtq and immigrant rights. mr. ho's appointment would

consider to the diversity of the board being of chinese descent, and fluent in mandarin and it gives all san francisco residents, regardless of immigrant status, a voice, implementation, and equal rights to serve on local commissions and bodies. we strongly urge the rules committee to select hanz to the housing stability oversight board. thank you very much. >> chairman: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: yes. good morning, supervisors. i serve as president of the national lgbtq bar association, and i'm seeking support of the appointment of hanz ho to the oversight board. since its founding in 1989, the bar association has been a legal voice for

the lgbtq community, and represents tens of thousands of lgbtq people, attorneys, judges, law students, allies, and other legal professionals across the united states. i have worked with hanz on numerous occasions, both in his role as speaker, and in our national bars and conferences, and in his role with the non-profit asylum connect. i'm well-acquainted with his very strong work ethic. as you have heard, as an openly gay immigrant who has a strong personal understanding of the real-world impact of social housing, especially given his work in this area and his experience as an s.r.o. resident, i believe he will bring an important perspective to the board, and i know he would approach issues with the keen focus on equality and fairness and will take his responsibility very seriously. again, i'm pleased to

provide this recommendation for mr. ho. >> chairman: thank you. next speaker, please. next speaker? >> caller: good morning, supervisors. my name is ocan. and i strongly support hanz's candidacy for his seat. i've known him for over four years, and he is very dedicated and passionate about making the lives of everyone living in san francisco better. and i witnessed it firsthand.

i worked with hanz recently on proposition "c," which he co-founded and worked on tirelessly. it passed, and immigrant leaders like hanz hou can be appointed to serve on our city commissions and boards. as someone who works with the immigrants, i thank him for his work on this. he has been the vice president on the first resource platform for lgbtq plus asylum-seekers. so they have access to resources, such as affordable housing. he has been doing this on a voluntary basis. he has experience in affordable housing and community developments, but, most importantly, he has the passion to make affordable housing a reality in san francisco. one-third of san francisco's population are immigrants. and i believe hanz hou is

the only lgbtq immigrant candidate here, and we need hanz's voice on this board to make sure our lgbtq plus immigrant community is represented. that's why i'm supporting his candidacy for seat six or 11 on this board. thank you for listening. >> chairman: thank you. >> clerk: i would just like to note we have approximately two additional public comments in line to speak at this time. if you have not already done so, please dial *3 to be added to the cue to speak. for those already on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. can we have the next caller? >> caller: hi. my name is wilfred chu. i would like to thank supervisor aaron peskin and supervisor raphael mandelman mand and connie chan for the opportunity

to speak. i'm also speaking on behalf of hanz hou's candidacy. i think his unique experience as a resident in an s.r.o. is going to be experiences that other candidates will not be able to bring. he has also dedicated his career towards affordable housing, which shows that he has a passion -- not only a passion, but he is willing to roll up his sleeves in order to create a situation that is much better than it is today. his activism also extends to other issues, and he is not just a one-issue activist. he cares about the whole community. with that said, i would hope that this body will advance hanz's candidacy, and if there are any

questions, i'd be more than happy to answer. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. next speaker please. and if there are anymore speakers after this next speaker, please get in line. >> caller: good morning chair peskin and supervisor mandelman. i'm a member of the san francisco displacement coalition, and the san francisco tenants' union. i really like the competition of this oversight board and the choices that supervisor peskin has made. the two tenant advocates seem fine, with lots of experience, with hands-on experience. ben fujioko and fernando -- i worked in

the housing advocacy spaces with them and i recommend that. mr. boranski, i'll take your word for it. he seems very qualified, and chante zing as well. i worked with her in the tenant advocacy and for state and federal and all kinds of tenant work. and so as an at-large member, with all of her experience, she would be great. also davita escaveda -- i've worked with her and she is quite good. so i approve of your recommendations. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. have there any other members of the public for public comment on item number three? >> clerk: we have at least one more speaker at this time. >> chairman: okay. >> caller: thank you,

supervisors, for letting me speak. this is rudy corpus. i'm speaking on behalf and support of john jakoval. this man has a lot of potential. i truly believe he is on the rise. one day he will probably be a supervisor, and might be the mayor. but i truly believe in this brother and i support him 100%. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. are there any other speakers? >> clerk: i believe that completes our public comment list. >> chairman: okay. public comment is closed. i want to really thank all of the applicants, those who appeared before us today, and the one individual who was one able to appear, as well as members of the public, for their comments. supervisor preston, do you have any additional comments? i'm ready and subject to comments from committee

members to make a suggestion. supervisor preston, anything that you would like to add? >> thank you, chair peskin. i just want to, again, thank everyone. i think we can tell from hearing from all these folks what a strong group of applicants we have. and so i just wanted to express my appreciation for all of the folks who have put their foot forward, and i'm looking forward to hearing your suggestions, chair peskin, of how to move forward. i will emphasize, from my office's perspective, that we are eager to move forward a set of applicants today, if possible. i realize there may be some procedural questions, and, again, i'm looking forward to your thoughts and your fellow committee members. >> chairman: thank you. vice chair mandelman?

>> thank you, chair peskin. i think, you know, this is an extraordinary set of folks, and i'm also excited to see the work that they do. if i have one concern about the group, as a group, it would be that there may be a lack of projects financing and development experience. and i do think hanz hou is actually someone who may have some of that financial investment background expertise on particular projects. that might be useful. i also think it would be a good thing to have diverse representation from all of san francisco's communities on this body. so that might be a thing for us to think about if we're going to take

another minute. and i although i have not met him, i think ed perion also does seem to have sort of project development experience that could be useful. that's a thought. in general, i think this is a great group of folks, and i'm looking forward to getting this body working. >> chairman: thank you, vice chair mandelman. and earlier i spoke to my constructionism and the way i looked at all of these seats over the weekend. and i do -- because we actually -- since i became chair of the rules committee, i don't think we've really had a conversation about what the charter sets forth as it relates to residency waivers. and i think this is a good time to do it. i think the few that we have granted since this committee was constituted a couple of months ago have been undisputed, which is to say that there was one applicant for one seat where a residency

waiver was required. but i want to call attention to really what should govern us, and we should take very seriously in granting residency waivers, which is set for ith 4.101, subsection "b," which ends with the following requirement, which is: a residency waiver should only be granted when there isn't a resident who could be located for that seat. so i think that relative to vice chair mandelman's words, together with words from members of the public, relative to mr. hou, who applied to a couple of different seats, one of them is seat 11, where a residency waiver is required. so i think we have to take that quite seriously. having said that, why don't i do my best at

making a suggestion to the committee, and, supervisor peskin, feel free to weigh into these discussions. for seat number one, which should be held by a person who is a resident of social housing, and there is only one applicant for that seat, and she, indeed, does fit that qualification. i would set forth remhi menalic. for seat number two, which is a person who is also a resident of a social housing development, there is only one applicant for that seat. that is bernita burch. for seat number three, we actually do have something there that we should discuss. we have mr. fujioko, who is imminently qualified, but we have someone there who is a san francisco resident, so i think that is a tough one for us.

i have profound respect and history with and for mr. fujioko. i do not know mr. perilon, just from the resume i read over the weekend. seat number five, mr. martith, which would leave seat six eligible for mr. boranski, where a residency waiver is required. seat number seven, there is one applicant, ms. zing, who is, indeed, qualified for that seat. and then would suggest for seat number eight, davita escaveda. for seat number 10, mr. landsburg. and for seat number 11, hanz hou. and so that would be where i would begin this

conversation at the board. and, colleagues, i will turn it over to you or to supervisor preston for any comments that you may have. i saw your hand go up, supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor: yeah, i think you may have, or may not -- i don't know that you mentioned john jakobafo seat four. >> chairman: i missed john for seat four. my bad. >> supervisor: and i would tend to think that although mr. perilon is a constituent of mine, given i do not know him, and given that history of mr. fujioko working on housing issues in san francisco, that, again, would be the right choice for that seat, even with the residency waiver required, in my view. >> chairman: okay. so maybe collectively we can take that as a motion

for manalic in one, burch in two, jackkobo in four, [inaudible] >> we would be hard-pressed to find anyone in our city and very few with the entire level of experience he will bring to this body. but, yes, that sounds like a very strong board. >> chairman: okay. supervisor chan? >> supervisor: thank you, chair peskin. yes, i think that the way you went through the list. i do want to express my

strong support for mr. fujioko, as well as mr. hanz hou in this case. knowing that, you know, mr. fujioko working with the chinese-american community, with the chinatown development center, really knows about low income housing residents and s.r.o.s and their needs, as well as just kind of seeing the story of mr. hou and his understanding of both capital investment, as well as just going through, again, public housing and that experience really speaks volumes into the work that needs to be done with this body. and i look forward to having them contribute from their perspective what it means to make sure

that low income families, immigrant families can be really well-cared for as we're moving this initiative forward. so i'm in support of their appointment. thank you. >> chairman: all right. clerk young, on that motion, a roll call, please. >> clerk: i would like to re-read it. it my apologies for maliki for seat one. mr. burch for seat two. fujioko, seat four. jakobo to seat five. barneski to seat six, with a waiver. seat seven, chante zing. seat eight, davita escaveda, with a residency waiver. .seat 10, landsburg.

and seat 11, hanz hou. >> chairman: that is correct. >> clerk: yes. on that motion to recommend this appointments, supervisor mandelman? >> aye. >> clerk: supervisor chan? >> aye. >> clerk: chair peskin? >> chairman: aye. >> clerk: the motion passes without objection. >> chairman: thank you. and let me say to the wonderful, qualified individuals who did not get on, you are welcome and encouraged to participate in the deliberations of this body, and i am sure that you will have as much power and input in those deliberations as though you were actually on the body. thank you supervisor preston. this was not an easy one. i really appreciate you're

being accommodating. mr. clerk, can you please cua the next item. >> clerk: item four is an ordinance to allow contracting parties that offer multiple health benefit plans at the san francisco international airport to charge covered employees a limited share of premium policies, and to clarify who must be covered by health benefits, and to adjust the date by which such health benefit plans must be in affect. >> chairman: supervisor mandelman? >> supervisor: thank you, chair peskin. this ordinance represents the next step in our efforts to ensure affordable, high quality health care for all of our airport employees and their families. this legislation makes three changes to the healthy airport ordinance that was passed by the board back in

november 2020. as you may recall, president walton and i had introduced legislation, working with closely with sciu, and teamsters 856, to require that they offer san francisco service employees a platinum-level, family health benefit plan at no cost to the employees, or make contributions to the covered employees in the san francisco city auctions program. thank you for your co-sponsorship. and supervisor chan, it was before your time, but i'm thankful for your predecessor's contribution. because the healthy airport ordinance requires an employer to cover 100% of the costs of the plans it offers, it creates an incentive for employers to

eliminate alternative higher cost plans they may have been providing where employees bore a share of the costs. in some cases, employees may prefer to keep through current coverage and continue to share the cost rather opt into the platinum level offered by the healthy airport ordinance, and we want to allow them to do that. the ordinance before you would allow that, and limit the cost that the employer can charge, with the difference between the premium plan and the alternative more expensive plan. and the ordinance will clarify an ambiguity regarding who clarifies by family health benefit plans, aligning independent coverage with the input from department of public health, based on standard practice, and,

third, it would extend it from march 21, to april 1, 2021. the employers' union and this board have asked them to enforce the healthy airport ordinance in accordance with these amendments. i want to thank o.l.c. for all of their help in addressing these issues, as well as city attorney lisa powell for quickly drafting this ordinance and for all of her work, and i want to thank those on local 2 and teamster 56, and giving us the opportunity to work with them to resolve them. and i want to thank erin mundy in our office for her ongoing efforts. and director mulligan from o.l.c. is available in committee members have questions. thanks. >> chairman: thank you for bringing this legislation, supervisor mandelman. i have no questions. supervisor chan, any

questions for comments? why don't we open this up to public comment. are there any members of the public who would like to speak to item number four? >> clerk: yes. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, the meeting i.d. 1875577823. and press ##. if you haven't already done so, please dial *3 to line up to speak. the a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. we have one member of the public in line to speak. >> caller: good morning. it's still good morning, board of supervisors. my name is peter finn with local 856, and behalf of the teamsters and our

labor allies, we support the healthy airport ordinance. i'm speaking in favor of the amendment. the amendment benefits workers buyer encouraging employers to offer additional options, and offers workers a chance to buy up to other plans, such as p.p.o.s that may be more expensive. for these reasons, we support the amendment. thank you. >> chairman: thank you, mr. finn. are there any other members of the public for this item? >> clerk: i believe that completes the members of the public who wish to speak on this item at this time. >> chairman: okay. public comment is closed. and supervisor mandelman, do we have a motion? >> i'd like to move to forward this to the full board with positive recommendation. >> chairman: all right. vice chair mandelman, on that motion, a roll call? >> clerk: supervisor mandelman? >> aye. >> clerk: supervisor chan?

>> aye. >> clerk: chair peskin. >> aye. >> clerk: the motion passes without objection. >> chairman: thank you. next item, please. >> clerk: next is item five: motion amending the rules of order by amending rule 3.25, 3.26, and 3.21. >> chairman: thank you, mr. clerk, we are joined by the chief author of this amendment to our board rules of order, supervisor ronan. supervisor ronan, good morning. it is still good morning for another three minutes. >> thank you, chair peskin. the proposed motion would establish a brand new standing committee in the board of supervisors that would serve as a place for legislative and policy discussions, focusing on addressing the comprehensive needs of children and their families. as it is, san francisco faces a sad reality that

it is home to fewer children than any other major city in the united states. with families pleaing the fleeie public school systems, the board of supervisors deserves a permanent legislative committee that can dive deeply and look holistically as to how the city can better serve the young people and their families, in partnership with the youth commission, first five commission, and other youth-focused city entities. while we have benefited from the ad hoc over the last year, select committees are a temporary nature and are only authorized to host public hearings, and lack authority to review and vote on city ordinance and fiscal items. this motion will establish a new permanent youth and young families committee, which will be empowered to hear resolutions, ordinances and those items

that have a direct impact on children, youth, and their families. for the first time in history, the board of supervisors will have a standing legislative committee that is explicitly focused on addressing the broad and diverse needs of san francisco's children and family. rather than a myriad of discussions taking place at the city board and school board. they will focus on leveraging city services to complement the educational mission of sfu.s.d., while addressing the needs that children continue to face, and other essential services that med their basic needs. [inaudible] and we're already in discussion with the commission about hosting joint hearings on shared priorities and other ways to strengthen the partnership between supervisors and the youth commission. we, as a city will be

better positioned to lead new initiatives that respond to the most pressing issues facing san francisco's families, and we can rebuild san francisco into a place where children and families can live with dignity and pride. we have made some amendments to the motion to focus the new committee's purview on legislative matters, while ballot measures that touch on these issues will continue to be reviewed by the rules committee. your offices should have received a copy of these amendments, which we hope one of you will be willing to introduce today. the amendments are as follows, on page one, line 13, striking the mention of ballot mentions on the clause. on page two, lines 11 through 16, striking language that would have referred youth ballots and charter amendments to the new committee. on page three, line six, striking mention of ballots and charter amendments from the

purview of the new youth, young adults, and family committee. i want to thank our clerk, angela calvio, and alyssa samara for really thinking deeply and thinking this through. on further reflection, given the very, very difficult timeline of getting all the ballots measures on the ballot, getting them heard properly, and the work of the clerk's staff to monitor several committees simultaneously, and wanting to make sure that there aren't mistakes made getting measures on the ballot, i felt like it would be easier and more appropriate to take away those measures from a third committee by putting the stress on the clerk of the board to have to monitor three committees, perhaps create special committees. it's just too much.

it's just too much to ask. [please stand by]

. >> chairman: why don't we go to public comment on this -- oh, i'm sorry supervisor chan. >> supervisor chan: i was just thinking about how do we move this important agenda forward making sure that our clerk can do the best that they can, you know, that they can to really meet our goals and needs and this is really a critical piece. i really, again, just given what we have been through in the last ten months as families and with just all the issues just be it from low income

families in need of meals during this pandemic to the digital divide to just re-opening schools and all these issues impacting our kids and families and your thoughtfulness about structuring this and we really focus our issues and time and resources to be able to address these critical issues and making sure there's a connection between what is happening with our kids in the school districts or even our private schools with the board and what the board can do and what the city can do. so i am definitely in support of your efforts on this and your amendments today and i just wanted to be able to say that out loud and also to cosponsor this just amendmenting this today so thank you. >> chairman: thank you,

supervisor chan. and, with that, why don't we go to public comment. are there any comments on item 5? >> clerk: yes. please call 415655-0001. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. at this time, we have two in line for public comment to speak on this matter. first speaker, please >> good afternoon now supervisors. calvin quick calling in. the youth commission as the legislation referred to us on march 1st and we wholeheartedly support this legislation to

really appreciate supervisor ronen for her staff and we had a great discussion about ways that the board and youth commission can work together and how really excited. and so i just want to go over a couple of recommendations for us to go over this together. as one option that we looked through. a few other things having a youth from or recommended by the youth commission or standing item to report issue importance to youth and youth activities to the commission. also, if possible, haves the committee be held during youth accessible times after school. we know that's potentially an issue, but the clerk and so if

a potential work around given that the sort of jurisdiction of this committee and youth commission are very similar, having any legislation referred to from this youth committee also to the commission holding it at 5:00 p.m. on mondays and having that opportunity for youth input on legislation that is by nature going to be affecting youth and families. and, then having youth commission have a standing item on the new committee agenda to report back to the committee on any youth input. so we'd love to continue this discussion. [inaudible] >> chairman: next speaker, please.

next speaker. >> chairman: hello, caller. you may be on mute. you may begin your comment. caller, if you're on the line, you may begin. the caller may not be listening to us at this time. operations, do we have any additional callers? that completes our public comment list. okay. public comment is closed and i would like to move the amendments that supervisor ronen read into the record. that motion, mr. clerk, a roll

call please. >> clerk: [roll call] >> clerk: the motion is amended without objections. >> chairman: and, then i'd like to make a motion to send the item to the board with recommendation. i apologize, we got notice too late or somehow it got lost in translation to send it as a community report. it will go before the board at our following board meeting next week. my apologies. >> i forgot to thank paul moanhay of my office who had been working with calvin at the youth commission to make sure they're deeply involved in that.

>> chairman: paul, you are officially thanked. on the motion to move the item as amended to the full board with positive recommendation. roll call, please. >> clerk: on that motion [roll call] >> clerk: the motion passes without objection. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor ronen. take care down there and next item please. >> clerk: next on the agenda is item number 6. resurrection pursuant to item 4.113. construction of an observation wheel structure in golden gate park for a term starting february 28, two thousand twenty, and lasting for one year follow the current permit expiration term, with full removal march 15, 2022. >> chairman: thank you, clerk young. we heard this on the adoption

without the reference calendar at our last board of supervisors meeting where we got plenty of public comment but thought that we should give an opportunity for more public comment in a more robust discussion and that is what is before us today. the resolution speaks for itself. with that, i will turn it over to the district one supervisor whose district encompasses golden gate park who i have not been able to speak to since last tuesday about this item. supervisor chan and i are in a quorum with that. supervisor chan, the floor is yours. >> supervisor chan: thank you, supervisor peskin. i really appreciate this resolution that is coming before us because i think that this resolution really brought to sort of the conversation a series of conversations that we

have been having in the last few weeks really about golden gate park as a historic park and how we really should be care for this park. this will specifically brought to my attention really started off with some of the environmental concerns that my constituents have and that's including the light of the wheel and the noise and just how it obstructed the view on a ground level when park visitors are visiting the area. in all of those, with also under the impression that this was going to be a temporary installation of this structure now known as the observation wheel in honor of the golden

gate park's 150th anniversary. and, obviously, because of the pandemic, so many of our activities and planned celebration like even chinese new year were on pause in 2020 and continued -- some continued even until 2021. knowing that the golden gate park celebration -- 150th celebration was paused because of the pandemic, i thought that, you know, with this wheel, that was the intent -- that was what the wheel was intended for perhaps that it could stay for another year, but with the condition that we mitigate light, the lighting and the noise and the generator issues. and here's also why i think that the board should step in to exercise this authority to

install whether we go allow this structure to stay for another year. you know, the golden gate park has transformed quite a bit to the soccer to now the $20 million tennis court and also in the last decade there were lighting ceremonies throughout the park including conservatory of flowers. the park really has transformed for some view it as better, for some to view it as just different. and i want to go back to some of the concerns that my constituents have raised about wild life, some of these issues that i do agree, you know. maybe just a light of the wheel itself doesn't really in a

temporary fashion, perhaps it's only a temporary impact but collectively the lighting at the wheel, the lighting of the tennis court, the lighting of the holiday tree, now with the lighting of the wheel for another four years and then some really create a question of whether this is environmentally friendly. how does it really impact our wild life in golden gate park? that was really initially my thought when i expressed my concern about the wheel. now, as i kind of dig deeper, you know, another issue spurred up for me. however, i do think that there are other ways to address this other issue that, you know, came to my attention really specifically on the contract of this wheel. and, let me be very clear about

this resolution. while this resolution whatever that may happen today at this committee and whatever that this committee may decide to do with this piece of resolution and even if it were to go to full bore for a vote even if this committee agree for it to move forward, let me be very clear about the contract and some of the questions that now i've learned about and will raise and continue to raise in this. i would not give up on this issue just knowing, you know, whether whatever happened with this resolution, i really now have identified issues around this contract. the fact that the revenue generated from the wheel is going to a nonprofit that has been under and part of an ongoing public corruption investigation. and, in question and when asked

about it -- about this contract to an extent is to cover the n

now disgraced former head of public works was able to exact money from corporations like recog and stash it in that same organization which is a little akin in my mind to a swiss bank that is doing business with some very questionable entities. but with that, if supervisor

mandelman has no comment, why don't we go to public comment. mr. young, why don't we open this up to public comment. >> clerk: yes. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call (415) 655-0001. the meeting id is 1875577823. then press pound and pound again. if you haven't already done so please dial star 3 to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you begin your comment. we have 75 listeners and 29 callers at this time. >> chairman: first speaker, please. and, colleagues, in so far as i am supposed to join the land use committee in an hour, would you be okay -- i hate cutting public comment down. but if we can cut it down to a minute and a half, i will have a chance of joining that and i

have amendments to the items at land use at 1:30. so, mr. young, if we can have it to a minute and a half per speaker or i might have to turn the gavel over to vice chairmandelman. >> clerk: normally we cut it to one minute or 2 minutes. >> i am sure that 90 seconds is fine. >> clerk: okay. we will time it for 90 seconds. >> chairman: i apologize for cutting down public comment, but that's what mondays look like. okay. first speaker please. >> eilene bogan. i am concurring with this resolution. extending this contract by one year due to covid related issues is more than fair.

and supervisor chan has stated in the media, while we all can agree, anti-corruption and good government policies are of utmost importance. extending the contract by one year rather than four years avoids the perception of the privatization of public assets. an example of this was the privatization of public assets with professional soccer at kizar stadium. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is jackie flynn, and i am the executive director of the institute of san francisco also known as apri. apri serves thousands of low income families across the city primary live engine the southeast sector of the city,

and, for decades, we've provided community programs that engage and educate voters around all type of civic issues. we also support job seekers with multiple barriers to employment and provide life inspiring experiences to youth, supporting their career, dreams, and aspirations. i'm here because i'm in support of the four-year extension that allows the observation wheel to remain in place until 2025. i hear the concerns about the environmental impact and i would really like everyone to consider the social impact. i would like to express. and i want to humbly show concern because this effort seems to be surprisingly proposed after being unanimously supported by historic preservation as well as the rec and park commission. on both of those meetings, i observed residents in my community in support of the full four-year extension. i ask you to consider the

voices of the bayview community to allow families and children an opportunity to experience the observation wheel. in addition, i'd like to just state that over the last year during the pandemic, our rec and parks department has strengthened their community relationships providing safe and healthy spaces for our families to continue to thrive despite social challenges this time has been exacerbated over the last year. >> clerk: thank you. we have the next caller, please. >> clerk: hello, caller, you can proceed with public comment. >> hello, my name is mickey nixon. i am calling to support the four-year extension of the

farris wheel. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is don franklin and i'm the president of the parks chapter of spiu and i'm in full support of going on with what has been recommended by both the rec and park commission to move this as soon as possible. the vendor does provide 500 free tickets a month that my co-workers actually go and take these kids to the farris wheel. the wheel's a good thing for the recovery of the city. it brings in tourism, it brings in revenue. revenue to our department means

jobs as far as our needed folks who work with these kids, we need more revenue and more jobs. this was overwhelmingly supported by the sf chamber of commerce. and in order to keep the recovery going, we've got to have revenue. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. i'd just like to make a quick statement before we move on to the next caller. i'd just like to say that public comment for this item is being taken today and will not be taken again when it appears on the board of supervisors agenda and the committee report scheduled for tomorrow. can we have the next caller, please. >> chair peskin, vice chair

mandelman. i'm a board chair for the richmond district ymca. i'm here today to state my strong support for the four-year extension for the farris wheel in golden gate park which i know was unanimously approved by the historic preservation commission and the rec and park commission which each heard extensive arguments of the like made by supervisor chan. i'm acutely aware of the pressures covid-19 has placed on families and kids in the city. this wheel will attract families to the park, the revenue will support the park going on into the future and it will also support richland merchants and businesses near the park. i strongly urge you to extended wheel in the park for four years. thank you so much for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is kevin carol. iep the president and ceo of the hotel council of san francisco i'm also a resident of san francisco myself. i'm calling in support of the existing agreement and approval that's gone to a vote the historic preservation commission and rec and park to extend the farris wheel for four years and proposed the one-year extension that's being heard today by your committee. the farris wheel is something that will definitely help with our recovery of the city. the recovery is going to be long-term and by allowing this to go through with the current approval that it has for four years will bring back visitors and residents to san francisco and also help promote our city. so i ask that you don't move forward with the proposed one-year extension and recognize and approve the four-year that was already approved before you. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller.

>> hi. i'm a district 3 resident. i oppose the extension of the sky star wheel in golden gate park and oppose the sky star wheel being in golden gate park at all because the life negatively impacts. migrating birds and bats, nesting owls and great blue herons. these connect people to our eco system. i appreciate the san francisco board of supervisors approving the resolution in 2018. this wheel conflicts with this bio diversity resolution and conflicts with the healthy eco system and bio diversity goals. when our wild life population is so reduced as to not be able to reproduce, the eco system that feeds us and gives us the oxygen to breathe is destroyed. golden gate park is one of the rare spaces in san francisco

that does large enough to permit more of our wild life to produce. the wheeled diesel generator is complete opposite of the work. at a minimum, the diesel generator and all the lights must set off at sunset. the contractual issues are reprehensible. the city of san francisco does not get the revenue from this wheel. the vendor and a nonprofit get the revenue. please remove this sky star wheel permanently from golden gate park as soon as possible. my comments are complete. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next speaker, please. >> my name is verdict ron can oliva. i'm a native san franciscan, and like many san franciscans, i have a long history with

golden gate park. i care about what happens to it and in it. i'm calling this morning to say the st. louis wheel as i like to think of it does not belong in golden gate park. it belongs in an amusement park. your vote to limit the wheel and always open to you is a vote to protect the park that is the treasured respite of the people you represent. we are relying on you to make your decision based on fact. and the facts are that golden gate park is indeed our refuge from the noise and lights and stresses inherent in city living. however, the park is this refuge precisely and only because there is an environment healthy enough to support wild life. the wheel disrupts the life cycles of that wildlife from insects to mammals to birds.

and in that very process, the wheel steals the refuge that the golden gate park is for us, your constituents, including for those among us who can't afford to leave the city. the facts also include our duty to know and understand the purpose for the creation of golden gate park -- >> clerk: your time is up. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello, supervisors. this is david. i would like to share my comments about the wheel in golden gate park. worth noting by the golden gate park. the original contract was approved by one year but has been open only two years due to covid-19. i'm trying to support the expansion of the wheel. i'm an ice cream truck owner and the business has been in the golden gate park for almost

nine years. because of the pandemic, it was a strong impact to all the businesses. but, when the wheel opened during the pandemic, the business operationally got better. it attracted people to the golden gate park to drive business and get more sales. in other words, the wheel's helping the businesses to get recovered from the pandemic. i believe it's really important for the local businesses for the businesses around golden gate park. for this reason, i hope the wheel can stay in the golden gate park for longer. please take consideration for it. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi, this is phillip calling in support as well of the extension of the sky star wheel

in golden gate park for four years. this is a critical element of the golden gate park 150th celebration that's been mentioned that has not been able to follow through on its plan, but, beyond that, it's a critical park of the enjoyment of the park for 500 youth and families per month as part of this plan as the caller previously mentioned. and, as a way to bring -- and brings in a destination within the park that's focused on culture, family, and connections to the broader city. thank you for allowing me to comment. i support the four years strongly. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller? >> hello, supervisors. can you all hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed.

>> yes. i'd like to thank supervisor peskin, chan, and mandelman. i am a member of district 8 and a newly volunteer member of the park alliance and i support the four-year extension. i do hear and understand some of the concerns that were mentioned, but i would like to say that golden gate park is large enough to accommodate all the values of san francisco including families in item 5. you mentioned how important it is to bring families back and this gives families the opportunity especially during a time in covid to give our families and youth an opportunity to come out, enjoy the outdoors and to experience a greater community outing out there. also, we've heard from labor who supports it for jobs. community based organizations who've phoned and joined the support. i ask you that you move forward with the four-year extension

and allow the familyings of san francisco to be able to experience multiple different aspects of living in the city. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi. i'm calling in. i'm a long-term resident of district 4. i support the compromise, thank you, supervisor chan and peskin. i actually believe in science. i'm an environmentalist. it is the environmental groups that are the experts. all of them have chimed in about how this wheel will hurt the very land for the birds, the sierra club.

i think it's a fair compromise, the one year as that satisfies all parties and i think it's sad that we have to argue with the leaders of our parks to keep out things like this or put real grass in the ground in the parks and we're going more and more into those kinds of arguments rather than being on the same side on things. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am kelly nice. i'm a resident of district 2 and i own a business in district 3. i'm a proud board member where i have served for over 20 years

on the parks alliance which helps make san francisco a more livable space and have for over 50 years. for the last 20 years, we've helped raise over $20 million to improve san francisco parks and open spaces. supervisor chan is a former parks and rec employee and knows well this contract was improved. i'm absolutely in favor of the four-year extension for the wheel. we need the tourism, the entertainment options, the jobs, and income. it's unique and fun and brings people to the park. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. my name is joyce armstrong. i'm president of the public housing tenant association better known as phta. i'm calling to give my support

for the four-year extension to support park and rec and what we're planning to do to bring back -- to strengthen our economy and help this city recover from covid. i'm in strong support. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hello. >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> my name is brian kennedy. i produce special events here in san francisco. i am in full support of extending the four-year sky wheel in golden gate park. the wheel has been a positive attraction to the community and a vital tool that will aid in the recovery of the broader businesses just like mine. tourism event production

industries have been hit the hardest and we need this wheel in golden gate park. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. hi everybody. my name is chica menzi. i'm a program specialist and i'm also a hunters point resident and i am in full support of the four year extension of the farris wheel. i think in terms of protecting wildlife they should forget we have an operation closing time where the lights go off when operation stops. other than that, i think that this would be a great way to bring more families and youth on this side of town to go and explore other parts of the city. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. this is robert tesler.

active san francisco park user. practically raised all my children in the parks. just a few brief comments today in support of the four-year extension. first, the observation wheel is a positive attraction for the community and the city. attractions like this provide a real boost to the neighborhood and neighborhood businesses. especially in light of the pandemic and the economic recovery, attractions like this provide a real and needed boost. the four-year extension has to my understanding and i think a few people have pointed that out have been approved by the historic reservation community and the rec and park committee. i have to ask the question, how many government entities this will take to screw in this particular light bulb. i believe we've reached our limit. i know that the board can walk and chew gum at the same time, i can't help but comment that certain members seem to be

spending an inorder nant and disproportionate time on this matter. it's already been reviewed. so i think we should focus on real matters such as homelessness and issues that have been cast within overseeing the parks. thank you very much. >> thank you. can we have the next caller. >> good i guess we're in the afternoon. we support the resolution. our precious park land is often viewed as empty open space just waiting if for buildings or other attractions to be added to it. we are very concerned that rec and park never asked for approval to place this structure in golden gate park. rec and park and their vendors are fighting so desperately against this one structure that

we have to wonder what other development projects is the rec and park department planning for golden gate park. we suggest that the supervisor add this to her list of questions. the special interest groups will always want one more feature built in our premier landscape park. we will lose our park land to those structures turning golden gate park into a series of attractions for the few lone trees here and there, a sad reminder to future children that this was once a landscape park. get this intrusive anti-nature structure out of golden gate park forever. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi, my name is cathy shoop

and i own annie's hot dogs and we are a food vendor in golden gate park and the sky wheel has helped us a lot to make it through the pandemic especially monday through friday. the park is always pretty busy saturday and sunday if the weather's decent, but monday through friday, we really struggle to open and to make ends meet and most of the reason we open is to keep people employed since i have ten full-time employees that have worked for me for a long time. i think it's very important that we keep the wheel there for four years for the economic recovery. and, as far as the environmental concerns, i understand those, but this part of golden gate park is not really the premier natural area. you know, we have a hot dog

park at spreckles lake and that's a much more peaceful place. this area already has two museums and the conservatory of flowers so i don't really see that concern. i personally would appreciate the four year extension. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> yes. good afternoon. this is linda schafer speaking in strong support of the resolution. golden gate park has been described as being many things to many people. that may be true, but sadly it cannot be all things to all people. in particular, it cannot be both an amusement park and an urban refuge where individuals and families enjoy recreation

in a setting that is supportive of nature. there are amusement parks elsewhere for those who want to ride a farris wheel. we have only one golden gate park. thank you, commissioners, for thinking of nature, bio diversity, climate action and the long run. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is stephanie wiseman. i'm from sf nature and i support fun and i also support the one-year compromise with the lights out sunset and i have two points. first that the wheel's light show functions as a single 150' tall strobe light. this is not the bay bridge lights. much smaller lights have been documented to negatively impact nature including owls and humans. they're used for pest control

actually. also, i would like to note there are 26 robotically strobe lights controlled. on 2-17 to the hpc that the concourse was always designed to function like a downtown park. this is not true. in 1894, the fair had a 266' tall observation structure like the eiffel tower with 3,000 lights in the middle of the concourse. the public sent them a team to keep the music concourse mcclaern in 1896 had the electric tower dynamited. william hall stated the value of the park consists of it being a park and not a catch all for almost anything misguided people may wish up to it. i appreciate your time and now my comments are complete. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is susan from the fine arts museum of san francisco which includes the museum that looks right over the wheel. we strongly support the four-year extension of the observation wheel. we see the music concourse as a major destination and also as an economic recovery driver and the wheel really adds an exciting and joyful experience to the park. we've been voicing our support both the park and rec and the historic preservation commission and also want to restate it here that we're fully in support of the four-year extension and, of course, we support financial transparency so the disclosure of any financial details that are needed per the comments earlier that we are in support. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller.

>> greetings, supervisors. thank you, chair, vice chair, and supervisor mandelman. i'm a district 8 voter. i want to thank you for the public forum to express my frustration and again having to call in for public comment on this issue. as i was framing out my thoughts on it i realize i couldn't say it better than commissioner mazola said last week. i and all of the other commissioners did hours of reading and debating and listening to public comment and made our decisions based on that due diligence. as the board of supervisors disregards all of that and overrides our decision, all of the work and thought that went into it was a waste of time. what good is to have any

commission if the board decides they don't like the outcome, they will just override us. thank you for listening. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi, my name is rob can. i run a youth sports nonprofit in the lower at 2,000 lower income youth in the city. both as someone who's responsible and delivers prooez programs to youth in the city as well as the parents myself, i'm calling to support the four-year extension of the sky star wheel in golden gate park and oppose the one year extension being here today. i love the wheel and what it gives to my family and the community as a reason to go to golden gate park and we believe that the park should be for everyone in having an

attraction like this is very important for me and people like me more than ever. i'm impressed also that youth tickets and senior tickets are affordable and also that many of the youth that we serve will be able to go and ride the wheel for free and experience the beautiful views of the city. so i support this -- the wheel staying for four years. thanks so much. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hey there. my name is ryan smith. i'm the production manager for bluegrass held in golden gate park. i am in full support of of the extension of the observation wheel made by both the historic preservation commission and the rec and park commission. obviously local businesses and events have been impacted immensely the last year and any

positive attraction that brings families back to the park seem to be desperately needed at this time. also, it seems that if the board inserts itself on this matter and sets a precedent that every structure in golden gate park is subject to 2/3 approval, hardly strictly outside lands, beta breakers will face additional time consuming and unnecessary hurdles. these events not only bring joy to our community but are part of the social and cultural traffic of the city. my comments are complete. thanks for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi, my name is martha aaronsol. i'm a resident of district 5. i'm a proud volunteer. i also have the cochair of the tennis coalition and the president of the inner sunset park neighbors. the group is for all people who work, play, and live in the

inner sunset. i'm strongly in favor of the four-year expansion i've been down there and people are waiting in line to go on the wheel coming from out of the city and i'm very excited as well as people from the city and the parks works so hard to support the parks throughout the city and raise money and improve playgrounds throughout the bay. so please support the four year extension. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi, good afternoon . can everyone hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> awesome. my name is lila pitman i'm the director of dance community. i would like to say i'm in full support of the sky star wheel and not only am i in full support of the wheel, but i'm in full support of the four-year extension. i feel that san francisco

really, really needs this not only to bring families closer together especially after a time such as this pandemic that we all have been facing, but it will also bring revenue into the city. i understand some of you guys have issues with the contracts that have been, you know, under way dealing with sf parks alliance. we have, our organization has collaborated with sf parks alliance in the past and what i can say is they have been definitely providing -- activating our community parks here in [inaudible] as well as providing programs and opportunities to underserved communities. and so even though you guys may not be aware of where that money is going, i heavily believe that that funding would definitely support programs that are in underserved communities. i am in support of the extension of the sky star wheel. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller.

>> hi, my name is genie oralana. we enthusiastically support a four-year extension of the sky star wheel. in the brief time the wheel was open, we saw an increase in park visitors overall not to mention a bump in business. the wheel makes people happen and more importantly the vendor plans to distribute 16,000 tickets to our most underserved residents. bringing folks to the park who may otherwise never visit. that seems very promising to us especially following such a terrible year. we also have a plan to remedy concerns. parkwide and all of us in the park welcome this temporary but joyful attraction to you're little active music concourse area of the park. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller,

please. >> hi. my name is jennifer freeland. i'm a resident of san francisco and a mother to two elementary-aged children. i am in full support of the full four-year extension of the sky wheel. i think it's an attraction for our city that will bring joy to many of our families and it's also an important economic driver to our city. i think there's more than one way to enjoy the park and i also question the decision to bring up this issue again when it seems like it was really [inaudible] by the historic preservation and the parks and rec. thank you for your time and that's all the comments i have. >> clerk: thank you. next caller, please

>> hello. i live in golden gate park with my family. i'm call engine support of the four-year extension and oppose the proposed one-year extension. the wheel is a positive attraction for the community and families like mine and others a little levity during what's considered a difficult time during the pandemic. i also understand in the aid and recovery of the vendors of the tourism. i have grown to really embrace the wheel in the park and look forward to having it around for a couple more years and it was also approved by the historic preservation commission and the rec and parks commission. i don't know why it's being discussed right now. you know, thank you very much

and have a good day. >> clerk: thank you. just a quick announcement. if you haven't already done so, please press star 3 to be added to the queue to speak. for those already on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. at this time, we have approximately 72 people listening with 31 people in line to speak. and, in addition, please note that public comment for this item is for today and there will be no additional public comment at the board of supervisors meeting. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. my name is julie dunn and i am a resident of district 7 as well as a mother raising six generation san franciscans and a small business owner of an event planning business that

has been greatly impacted this year. i am calling in support of the extension. this wheel is a positive, wonderful attraction for our community. it's also a vital tool that will aid in the recovery of small businesses like mine, tourism, and event production industries. please consider the need the san francisco residents and workers in this regard. again, i'm in full support of the extension of the wheel. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can i have the next caller please. >> hi, can you hear me. >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> hi my name is nancy norris from the ymca of san francisco. i oversee the preschool

program. calling for extension of the sky wheel in golden gate park. we believe that the wheel's a positive attraction for the community and it will also help san francisco's economic recovery. the affordability allows many of the families from our program to enjoy golden gate park and to enjoy the beauty of the park and surrounding attractions. we are in full support to the existing four-year extension. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hello. >> clerk: hi. we can hear you. please proceed >> okay. great. i live on -- i'm a resident of the bayview and i actually just found out about this farris

wheel last night. i'm not upset but i am disappointed that i did not know about it and that i'm just now finding out that it's trying to be taken down or that my area was limited to the knowledge of this farris wheel. i would like to say i'm in support of the four-year. i would like for me and other people my age to be able to have access to something like this for longer than one year and, also, i don't think it should just be for one year because we are still in a global pandemic and i believe that i'm still taking safety precautions when it comes to being around other people so i would want to as we start to open up more, i would like to eventually be able to still have access to it and not a year later if we happen to still be in the same stage that we are as a city.

i wouldn't be able to have that opportunity. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> clerk: do we have a caller on the line? there does not appear to be a response at this time. can we move on to the next caller?

>> good afternoon. can you guys hear me? >> clerk: yes, we can hear you. please proceed. >> my apologies. my name is daniel greg. i'm representing approximately 4,000 members in the city of san francisco. i'm call engine today as a representative to fully support the four-year extension in opposition of the limited one-year extension. golden gate park is a beautiful destination point for san francisco families throughout the bay area. the objection observation wheel adds to the attraction of the park. the carpenter ys union has a great relationship. the attractions like the observation wheels and events such as outside lands and bluegrass work and consistently provide living wage jobs. we are facing uncertain economic realities as we come

out of the global pandemic. we still do not know if the vast marjt of the community will feel comfortable enough to bring their families to the park and enjoy this attraction. limiting the wheel to one year is a step in the wrong direction. we ask if the san francisco rec and park decision as well as the historic preservation's unanimous decision to approve our four-year extension of the wheel in the park. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> i want to go ahead -- hello. hi. it's collin schmidt with the bay area. working with thousands of students and their families here in san francisco and we are in support of the four-year extension of the farris wheel. we are for anything that brings more happiness and more joy to san francisco and to the

families that live here. we believe that the due diligence has been done on this issue and that anything that is family friendly, revenue positive that contributes to other additional recreational programs is a good thing for not just a year, but for four years and we are benefits not for the attraction itself and for the passes that have been provided for the families that we're working with and that it succeeds in getting people to the park that wouldn't otherwise come. it's an incentive and an attraction that brings people into the park and we are in support of it and the four-year extension. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller.

>> hello, can you hear me. >> clerk: we're getting a local buzz from your line. if you have any other devices on, it would be appreciated if you can turn them off. but we can hear you at this time. >> i'm calling to support this [inaudible] . >> clerk: we can no longer hear you. we did hear you support the matter. however, the loud buzz is not allowing you to hear you at this time.

>> clerk: if you have issue, you can call back and we can take your comment at the later time. next caller, please. >> good afternoon. i'm a 45 year resident of san francisco. golden gate park is a crown jewel of san francisco. why on earth would it need a farris wheel to attract visitors. please top the commercialization of the park. honor the original intent of the agreement. move the wheel to pier 39 where it can all the benefits such as recovery, tourism, business, [inaudible] to underserved residents. please approve this one year reasonable resolution. i'm in support of supervisor chan's concern of funneling money through this project

that's under scrutiny and also regarding comments about the commission having already approved this meeting, we need to rethink how these commissions are created. maybe they have a slanted kind of view of what the forward motion should be in the city. i urge you to support the one year extension and the removal of the year. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. my name is chev asani. i'm calling in behalf of the san francisco restaurant we represent. we need to do all we can to safely bring tourism back to all parts of our city and the sky star wheel is a great opportunity to do so. attractions like this will only help the critical recovery period for our industry and others over the coming years

while providing a fun, unique experience for our local residents especially for youth and families taking into consideration our comments. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is kyle meyers. i'm calling today to voice my full support for the sky wheel in golden gate park. as a daily park user, i've always supported the addition of the wheel to the concourse. it is a fitting accompaniment to the variety of activities in that area. with the full extension it will continue to serve as a vital tool. additionally, as a small business owner and local event producer who utilizes golden gate park for numerous events

throughout the year, i'm extremely concerned about the precedent this would set would be subject to a 2/3 board approval. february of 2020 and it is still certain it would be up and running again. we could do without additional time, costly hurdles and approval processes, especially at a time when we're trying to bring live events back to the community. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is nate ford. life long san francisco resident. i wanted to say i'm fully in support of the four-year extension for the wheel. i think this, you know, it's a

lot of it is where i work it hasn't been able to experience this and, you know, i think, you know getting kids from, you know, parks backgrounds to come and extend something as beautiful as that wheel and the park would only just brighten up, you know their day because it's been kind of bleak as you all know. i'm in full support of the wheel and hope you guys approve it. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> my name is chris keen. i and my wife live in sunset.

we've been here aboutfifteen years. we've raised three kids in the city. i'm also from the midwest so i get a bunch of visitors from out of town. from the aesthetic standpoint, the farris wheel is very tasteful. it's not an amusement park like people have alluded to. it's a current attraction for kids who live here. not everybody who lives here or visits the park wants to look at roses or paintings. the farris wheel or something like it in my opinion has been missing from golden gate park and when it is taken down in four years, it's going to be missed then. i would also like to add that taking away from childrens' fun is exactly the kind of thing that lands san francisco in the national news for all the wrong reasons especially when we can't get kids back into school and when we can't get teachers affordable housing. i would suggest humbly that the grown-ups in charge of the supervisors focus on those issues full time as opposed to taking away the farris wheel.

thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> thank you so much. my name is john goldsmith. i'm a california native, 30 year san francisco resident. i am grateful to supervisor peskin for bringing this item to the rules committee. i have concerns about the way that deal came through about the observation wheel. it is bad for the environment. we know that. i appreciate the previous item on the agenda was about the families and youth committee. i support that as well because the youth will need the

environment in the future and this sort of deal, observation wheel is bad for the environment and it's inches towards privatization and it's impacting our bio diversity resolution passed by city hall in 2018. as a reminder, the official bird of san francisco is the california quail and they used to live in golden gate park, but they are now extinct because of human activity such as this. i'm all for fun, it's true, but i'd like to see the observation wheel in other places such as the exis alsoier district where the retail environment is horrible. or fraps clean up the super fun site at bayviewpoint. that would be a great attraction for the low income folks that live in that area. this is an out-of-state contract with missouri -- >> clerk: your time is up. thank you. can we have the next caller,

please. >> hi, supervisors. my name's levi johnson. i'm an sciu member and 've been living in the richland district since 2006. i have reviewed all the pros and cons on this issue and i'm calling today to support the four year extension already passed by two other commissions and oppose the one-year extension discussed today. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi. good afternoon. this is lavanda williams. i'm calling from bayview in san francisco. a resident for over 35 years. been in the city for 50 years. i am also chief stuart.

i am calling to support the four year extension. i propose the proposal extension for the one year that was being heard today. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is gregory deeser. i'm a member of sciu1021. i am calling in support of the existing four-year extension of the sky star observation wheel in golden gate park. it's a positive attraction for the city and an important part of restoring san francisco's tourism, hospitality, and recreation industries which have been hit hardest by the pandemic.

an enormous amount of time is being spent on the wheel while far more pressing issues have been on hand. the re-opening of our schools, homelessness and significant increases in crime. as was already stated, the one year proposal today would set a precedent potentially burdening some of golden gate park's most infamous venues. these are venues which create jobs in industries like food, transportation, cleaning, and public safety to name a few. the observation wheel has gun improving its commitment to the city by offering five00 prerides. to the children of san francisco. it is our hope that the board may drop this matter and uphold the four year extension made by the historic commission and the parks commission.

>> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is teresa folilo ramirez. representing approximately 5,000 workers and their families in marin and san mateo families. while the city is continue plating layoffs and service cut we cannot cancel anything contributing to. now drawing people from across the bay area and perhaps even the world to golden gate park. many will make a day of it lunching and visiting, local businesses spending money to cut the exists four-year extension to one year is cutting and limiting our economic recovery when the city government should be doing everything in their power to guarantee our successful recovery. please don't cut our limit, our potential for successful recovery. thank you. >> clerk: thank you.

can we have the next caller, please. >> clerk: i assume that we will skip that caller at this time and move on to the next caller. caller, we had a loud tone and we could not hear you. if you'd like to try to call back and get back in line to speak, you can do it. >> hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: yes. we can hear you. >> i'm calling to support the existing four-year extension of the sky star wheel is golden gate park being heard today. i'm excited to hear that community learning helps

students and public housing residents have the opportunity to experience this beautiful wheel and see the view of the city for free. providing this access and opportunity for our underserved youth that have been isolated for the distance -- with distanced learning for the last year is so crucial and needed and we are in full support of this resolution. thank you for giving me the time to speak on this resolution. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi, my name is [inaudible] gonzalez. [inaudible] -- this one is really testing me and chair peskin, and the committee, we're at a critical point. i had the honor to serve along rodney [inaudible] and the chamber. city economic recovery task force and i think we would all

agree we're at a critical point in our economic recovery. questions remain about whom will benefit when we look back on this period. god help us if this farris wheel is the biggest fish we're willing to fry. the parks and rec operation with went through two commissions. i believe all eyes are on that. i don't have a short memory. just in june or july of last year, several of you voted against a public advocate. if our concern was around corruption and these issues, then we should of sided with ronen, mar, haney at that time. i think it's unfire and disrespectful of all the volunteers at that alliance to try to legit mately corrupt the executive management of the city you're supposed to be keeping an eye on and now we find ourselves in the distractive battle.

we don't think you should ignore environmental concerns or input for the neighborhood. but i think by in large that supports the structure on a long term and for the economic recovery. >> clerk: your time has ended. thank you. next caller, please. >> hello. can you hear me. >> clerk: yes. we can hear you. please proceed. >> hi, my name's [inaudible] . i would like to keeping the farris wheel and [inaudible] -- extremely financially beneficial to small businesses in the area. plus, i think as a resident of district 10 that if we were not super aware of it and i think

the city should explore options and use this as a way to get young people back [inaudible] -- and especially recovering from covid. thank you, i'm done. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is drew becker, the ceo of the san francisco parks alliance and i serve as ceo because parks and public spaces are my great passion. the golden gate park 150 was intended to begin openingable city event to celebrate the park. this including shuttles running from libraries to equity zones to bring children and families to golden gate park. additionally, the sky star wheel has offered 500 free rides a month. attractions should be supported

by san francisco. through many initiatives, the park alliance invested over 100. some of these projects would not sxis without the parks alliance, washington square playground. panhandle playground, eagle plaza, conservatory of flowers and many more. a vital tool that will aid in the recovery and event production industries. we ask you to please consider the need of san francisco residents and workers in this regard. members and the board of supervisors seem to be spending an unprecedented amount of time on this wheel. when we should be focused on covid-19 vaccines, and fever pitch of small businesses struggling and increased crime. thank you for your time and i appreciate -- i appreciate working with every single one of you and all of your districts on making san francisco the greatest city in the country. thank you. >> clerk: thank you.

can we have the next caller, please. >> can you hear me now? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> good afternoon. david pillpel. so i commented last week before the environmental review officer before the appeal file of cathy howard no significant modification determination of the environmental review issue. i've not heard a decision on that yet. golden gate park is a public park, not an amusement park. i'm not crazy about the wheel at all. as a compromise, i support the resolution before you to limit the extension to one year and not four. one might ask what john mcclearen the founding superintendent of the park would say about this matter. i wonder given the public comment before me whether the recreation parks department

organized park concessionaries, community activists and parks alliance supporters here. i don't always agree with the board of supervisors, but i absolutely recognize that they are elected to represent the people. other city boards and commissions perform specific functions and are appointed to do so. anyone who wants to restructure the powers and duties of our city government can repair and try to pass a charter amendment. otherwise, it's entirely up to the board toll decide this one and i weigh in support of the compromise resolution before you today. thanks very much. >> clerk: thank you. can we get the next caller, please. >> hi, may i proceed? >> clerk: yes. please proceed. >> my name is noah lung. i am calling in support for the

four-year extension. i'm a long-term resident of the richland district. i've been working as a essential worker and i believe it's projects like these that are essential to restart the economy and generate revenue and, without projects like these, i wouldn't be able to work. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. are you done with your speech? if you have any -- >> reporter: i just wanted to repeat that i fully support the four-year extension of the sky star wheel. okay. thanks. >> clerk: okay. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. i am a district 10 resident,

hispanic, mom, nonprofit professional and wife and calling to share my full support of the existing resolution that has gone before the rec and park and historic reservation commissions. playground fair building and the community groups and parks that they support. my family is mixed middle class. i cannot think of a nonprofit that has made a better impact, a bigger impact a real and tangible impact on the livability of this city. with that in mind, i'm deeply disturbed of the accusations by supervisor chan. if their proof is there's a scandal, then they have some faulty logic. multiple bad actors. parks alliance has not been charged or incriminated despite

the words i've heard in the recent weeks. government leaders would be extra careful when they accuse. i learned that supervisor chan literally called the request for this investigation her coming out and aaron peskin said it was a fact they are crooked. this feels like politics at the reputation of the ordinance that every city benefits from if. i hope that everyone in government will get back to focusing on the real problems of the city but the ongoing, inefficient and expensive home strategy -- >> clerk: your time has elapsed. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon supervisors. my name is john korso. i also am calling in to support the existing four-year extension of the sky star wheel in the park and subsequently opposing the proposed one-year

extension being heard today. we ask the board drop this matter and allow the decision to approve the four-year extension and the rec and park commission to be upheld. as a matter of fact, we feel the members of the board are spending way too much time and energy on this talking about a farris wheel. we've got covid problems and we've got vaccination roll-out problems. cools are closed. we've got tents all over the city and we're worried about a farris wheel. that's where we stand here at local 38. i stand for myself and others who couldn't make it on the call today. everybody have a great day. >> clerk: thank you. i'd just like to make a quick announcement while i have a chance. members of the public who wish to make a public comment on this item should call (415) 655-0001.

meeting i.d. is 1875577823, press pound and then pound again. please continue to wait until you have been unmuted. we have approximately 16 members of the public waiting to speak at this time and i also want to remind members of the public that public comment on this item will be provided for today and will not be provided at the board of supervisors meeting. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> hello, you hear me? >> clerk: yes. we do. please proceed. >> this is ramon with local 261. representing over 5,000 members. i encourage to the supervisors and the public to vote on four

more years of this farris wheel. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. caller, you have been unmuted. you can proceed if you can hear us. caller, you can proceed with your public comment at this time. it does not appear that he can hear us at this time. can we skip him for now and move on to the next caller.

>> hi, this is pam hinthill. it's very strange that a farris wheel has somehow become the symbol of economic recovery. rec and park has called in all supporters from various organizations. why can't rec and park accept a one year compromise that accommodates nature. it is indeed difficult to have to argue with rec and park to protect nature. golden gate park is not just real estate. will bumper cars be next as suggested by another caller. no one seems to notice that the dollars for the wheel, 95% go to the sky star corporation investors who are based in

missouri. they will make millions. it does not help san francisco. i support having kids and adults out in nature, it helps to have nature nearby and accessible to all as golden gate park is please support the one year compromise. i would prefer that the wheel leave now as scheduled, but understand that some san franciscans still want a chance to ride and that there are some free tickets for one year and so this seems like a good solution for all. >> clerk: your time has elapsed. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi. i've lived in san francisco for about 15 years and currently in

the inner sunset. i'm calling in full support of the four-year extension of the wheel that's already been passed by the commission. i think the wheel is awesome. it really looks great. perfectly set between the two parks. great location for it. my daughter loves it. she loves seeing it every day. we haven't ridden it yet but we're excited to now that it's open again. i also represent [inaudible] -- advocate for more housing and other development in the city. we supported extension of the wheel originally. i think it's going to be really important for our small business community. they have really struggled through this. it's going to take them time to get back on their feet. as soon as businesses open. so, you know, we think we need the full four year extension to

help our community. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. >> as a private resident of the community and i'm calling in support of the actual extension of the four years for the farris wheel. and that's about it. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller.

caller, you may proceed with your public comment >> hello, yes. good morning. i didn't know my line had been unmuted until now. i'm a long-term resident of san francisco and the inner sunset and every time i see this wheel, my heart sinks. there's nothing environmental about it. it's sad this can be considered [inaudible] -- your children to nature. groups such as the friends in the tea garden parentally support this along with other people that make money for this park. parks alliance does not represent the interest of san franciscans and only wealthy people and there has never been -- there was never one community meeting about this farris wheel before it was instituted. there was not one community meeting about 150 anniversary of golden gate park which we didn't even know this

celebration was happening until it was canceled. i had to read about this in the paper. it's just wrong the way this is being done and shame on these members and the community being bribed by these tickets. we have to look at this every day and night and it's just part of the plan to destroy the interest of golden gate park at 9th and lincoln and it looks like a corporate entrance. the guard has been privateized. we're losing our nature bit by bit and don't represent anybody that are aappointed by special interest and contain all these people and, again, do not listen to us. all this is completely wrong. we need a complete transformation of the system and we need [inaudible] -- >> clerk: your time has elapsed. thank you. can we have the next caller,

please. >> hello. can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> okay. thank you, supervisors. good afternoon. my name is liola gans and i'm with the san francisco public housing tenant association phta. i am in full support of the four-year extension of the sky star wheel and i'm opposed to the one-year. thank you. >> clerk: can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is liz farrell and i'm the board chair for the san francisco parks alliance. i am a volunteer, i'm also a mom and avid user of golden

gate park. it's hard to believe that we're still talking about this. the wheel is part of golden gate park 150th celebration that was intended to be an equitable open city event to celebrate the parks. we have several initiative its dedicated to this that we still hope will happen including shuttles running from libraries and equity zones to bring children and families to golden gate park. additionally, sky star wheel is committed to families by offering free tickets per month. it's hard to believe that we are talking about the wheel when an amount of resources have been used on this. while the city faces much more challenging and pressing issues. as far as your questions about the parks alliance, i tell my

own children, if you have an issue with someone, confront them in a respective way. and reach out to the parks alliance with your questions before pointing fingers unfairly at a nonprofit. whose sole mission is to transform our parks spaces. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. my name is nancy. and, i'm the director of san francisco nature education as well as a field onothologist in golden great park where i study a colony of great blue herons that have nested there for 35 years. i want to thank supervisor peskin for bringing this to the committee. for all the people objecting to the time on this, i'd say this

is democracy and the original contract for the wheel was only for one year. so this is a reasonable compromise to make the farris wheel owners whole with a one-year extension. it's also settled that the bright lights, the artificial lights affect negatively bird migrations. and, we all know this. this is settled science. so i want to applaud the board of supervisors for this meeting and urge them just to go one-year extension like was originally planned and keep the park safe for wildlife and the people that enjoy it. also, when we talked about helping the local businesses that serve food, why is the sky wheel serving food? thank you very much and please extend this contract for one year. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller

please. >> greetings, supervisors. my name is maisha bell. i work for the ymca of san francisco. i am also a resident of district 5. i am commenting support of the four-year extension of the farris wheel. i feel like it provides an opportunity of hope and engagement for our youth. i don't think we should discount the impact it could have on their long-term development. we also know that in normal times, young people are spending less time engaged in nature and the pandemic has really increased that reality. while the farris wheel itself is not going to fix that issue, it can be a catalyst to getting these young people into nature and engagement and really intentionally provide support and opportunities that can expand their knowledge and access in this area. so i sincerely ask you to

really consider what this would mean on the future leaders of the city of san francisco and take advantage of our opportunity to really uplift them. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. my name is greg miller. i support the one-year that's being continue plated. i think it's good compromise for lovers of golden gate park and for those who would like to experience the fun of the wheel. five years is ridiculous to think of it as a temporary installation. in my opinion, it's likely to lead the permanent situation on the wheel and the music concourse the way things work. the rec and park department used to be the protector of our parks. it's long ceased to be that and is now an enterprise that seeks to monetize our public lands

and generate cash flow for whatever purposes. the board needs to step up to the plate here and exercise the rights of the charter not because of this specific issue, but certainly they need to ask why did rpd basically evade any type of board over review of this. and, what's so important about generating a cash flow for an out-of-town private vendor here which stands to make millions of dollars if this runs for five years. and, finally, why was that money parked in the accounts of a nonprofit which has no basically overview from the board or from the rest of the city. the rec and park commission has ceased long go being an effective oversight viewer of the rec and park department and is now subject to total regulatory capture. please take a look at this department and what it's doing -- >> clerk: your time has

elapsed. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi. can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> okay. i'm sure you're tired of hearing that today. so i'm a resident of san francisco and i just want to ask supervisor chan why she's spending so much time on this issue and not addressing the horrible assault that happened to a senior in the safeway parking lot? as residents of san francisco, we shouldn't be afraid to leave our homes. i'm asking that we focus on the important issues. that's all. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. my name is karen gonzalez. i'm the co-owner of the cochinica food truck in the

golden gate park and i'm supporting the four-year extension. when sky star wheel was closed, we did see a drop in visitors and business. customers would ask us daily when it would be re-opening as they were excited for a chance to ride the wheel. in a short period of time it has opened back up, we have seen an immediate increase in business and we don't know what will happen in 2021, i do belief that the sky wheel extension will contribute to bringing more visitors as additional. it will help neighbors businesses, their employees, the community, and the economy. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. i'd just like to make another announcement or reminder, if you have not already done so. please press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. we have approximately

thirty-four listeners and eight people in line to speak at this time. can we have the next caller, please. >> good evening, supervisors. i hate to say this again, but can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> thank you. my name is joann desman. our union represents over 2,000 workers who have been seriously impacted by covid-19 for the past year. i am hear to speak in opposition to pending legislation requiring a 2/3 vote on any temporary structures in golden gate park. this measure would be detrimental to the many events produced in our wonderful park. this would be a costly and time consuming burden to the production teams responsible for a great many events including hardly strictly bluegrass, opera in the park,

and outside lands which happens to be one of the biggest events for our union members. in the past year our union has seen 95% unemployment. any additional hurdles will be devastating to our employment. both of which did significant work before they rendered their decision. thank you for your consideration. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. caller, you have been unmuted. you can proceed with your comment. >> hi, i am an inner richman

resident. i support the four-year extension. while i am very cognizant of the effect of the light on bird migration, i think we should also take a look at other lights like the top of the sales force tower that haven't passed [inaudible] and i'd love to have the board focus on the two deaths we are experiencing each day from drug overdose. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> i'm calling to support the existing four-year extension of the sky tower wheel in golden gate park and opposing the one-year extension being heard today. this is rudy from united players. i'm a native of san francisco, born and raised. still live here and i know it's beneficial for the youth which

we serve throughout the whole city and so thank you for letting me comment. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> good afternoon. my name is michelle canter and i'm a long time san francisco resident of bayview for 57 years. i have raised children and grandchildren and other children in the city and i can remember when i used to go to play land back in the '60s and ride the [inaudible] and go to 38 play land to get on the farris wheel and go to the recreation that was at playland. this, i am -- i am very interested and i agree with the four-year term to extend the farris wheel. i think it is a very profitable and educational project for

other children who don't know about farris wheels. there's a great, a lot of things to learn about the farris wheel and how it operates. golden gate park is a beautiful park and i think this is a very nice attraction to the park celebrating the continuance of the celebration of golden gate park and i pray and hope that we continue helping each other and loving each other in god's way. thank you. >> thank you, can we have the next caller, please. >> hi. my name is robert moon. i'm a 20 year district 1 resident and registered voter and i voted for supervisor chan and thank you very much for giving me a moment to share my opinion. i support the four-year extension of the sky star wheel. it's economically and community

beneficial. we shouldn't need to revisit what's already been approved. i think it's a waste of time and it's actually encouraging visiting even further. so thank you very much. that's the end of my comment. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> my name is anthony i'm from 621 union, local labor union. i just want to say i support that farris wheel. i think some people forget when they were kids how it felt to ride a farris wheel. once you grow up, you kind of forget the things that you really -- that made you really happy to see and to be able to ride. that farris wheel means a lot to a lot of kids and not only that, we should have a whole park out here for these kids so

they can't be getting shot at, robbing, stealing, wondering why these kids doing what they're doing,. there's no support. i remember back in the day. we need to leave the farris wheel alone and revisit some of the other things that's going on in the city about where money is going. anyway. that's my little spiel for the day. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. and thank you for this opportunity to comment. i'm a san francisco native and also a 261 member. as a native, i don't want to lose anymore of what i consider general local attractions like playland. once these are lost, they're gone and you can't take your kids to them like my father to me and i took my son.

it's also a job creator and it's a revenue creator. i support a four-year license would be more appropriate and i do also believe the board of supervisors has more pressing issues to attend to such as pandemics and homelessness. this attraction is very popular among locals and i thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. my name is catrina fering and i'm calling to lend my voice to the overwhelming support you've heard today and to oppose this one-year proposal. there have been many points already raised today that i'd just like to echo. calling this in golden gate

park an exaggeration. you can enjoy views of golden gate park and the city. and it's a great way to dra

>> clerk: your time has elapsed. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is sofie and i'm a mother in district 8 and i use the park every single day with my daughter and i wanted to chime in and say what many others have said to thank parks alliance for their work to rebuild parks and playgrounds for families like mine that are relying on them in every neighborhood and truly the last year has underscored how essential these parks are. and, with regards to the farris wheel, i can't tell you how many parents talking about how much they appreciate this. it's been a rare source of whimsy and fun during a difficult time and i urge you to extend it for another four years. thank you so much for your

time. >> clerk: thank you. just to let you know, the next caller is the last caller we have on the line. if you have not already done so, please dial star 3 to be added to the queue. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> thank you. my name is kirt grimes and i'm the program manager with the aprisf. i would like to echo the sentiments of my colleague jacquelyn flynn. supervisors, most importantly i'm addressing you as a san francisco native and a resident of district ten . i'm in favor of the four-year extension. i believe this extension will allow all of us to enjoy the

park and its attractions, but most importantly, it will aid in our economic recovery and our recovery from this terrible pandemic. once again, i urge you to extend the stay for the sky wheel for four more years. i believe this extension will help all of us out in the long run in terms of our pandemic recovery and our economic recovery. thank you. >> clerk: all right. we had four additional people line up to speak. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi. this is ori deman. i'm a resident of district 8. i am in favor of the four-year extension. but i'm really appalled by the comments made by supervisor peskin and supervisor chan.

i'm a board member of park alliance and joined the park alliance so i can give voice to people who normally don't get heard. i joined the board because i think this is a part of my public service to not only join the board but continue the park alliance. so without any evidence, them trying to accuse a nonprofit that has an open policy that you can go and see online there is a 990 forum for them saying they are corrupt. i hope they will talk to us. they can come and see how we work and they will know that the benefit we provide to the city. yes, it's a controversial project, i understand that and i can hear peoples' voices, but just think about the number of kids who will benefit from it. it's a wonderful opportunity for kids to see this magnificent park from the top. i hope you support this

project. thank you. >> thank you, can i have the next caller, please. >> can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> my name is pinky kushner. i am in line with the four-year extension. those and its country atmosphere as well as people who seek the natural refuge the park is well-known for. the park has lots of entertainment in its natural state. we don't need an amusement park to have fun at golden gate park. but one of the commentors had mentioned playland. maybe we should. maybe the city should have a playland in the city just not in golden gate park. it would be helpful if the supervisors would take up this discussion and think about

where in the city a playland would be appropriate. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. are you able to hear me? >> clerk: yes. we can hear you. please proceed. >> yes. i was called to support the 12-month extension but not to support the 48-month extension. 48 months is really saying that it's going to [inaudible] -- like a permanently, and it's way too bright and tall to be there permanently. i do support the 12-month extension. but i do not support the 48-month extension. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller please. >> hi, my name is stephanie and

i'm also calling to lend my voice and support to the existing four-year extension of the sky star wheel in golden gate park. for all the reasons that have been previously expressed, but most importantly because two commissions have already looked at this and there are other important pressing matters for this board to address. and, i also worry that if the board inserts itself on this matter and sets that precedent that others have talked about that every other temporary measure is subject to 2/3 board approval, thresholds, really great events like hardly strictly bluegrass, outside lands, that additional time consuming and unnecessary hurdle and i also just want to say to the gentleman who was very furious there were no community meetings about this. there were no community meetings about the flow streets either that are affecting everyone all across the city as well. so please respect the decision

made by both the historic preservation commission and the rec and park commission and also for everyone who's trashing the rec and park commission, i've raised two boys in this city and they have done a phenomenal job of keeping youth sports active and youth engaged in sports which is also outside getting kids outside. so there's a lot to be outside in nature that doesn't involve just strolling through a park which my boys do and they also bike through it. they also play sports and that's also important and thank you so much for your time. >> clerk: thank you. i believe this will be our last caller. shall we get the next caller, please. >> yes. my name is lance grimes. i'm from district 3. i've been with san franciscans for urban nature. i support the current resolution before the rules committee for a one-year extension and i'm -- it seems like 100 callers came in today

with a cheat sheet in front of them that had all the same points. the one that really grates on my nerves a little bit is that this is such a great family event as far as i can tell you, you wait one hour in line for a three-hour ride. actually, i just read there's a new circus in town that will be performing in north beach. why not hire a local company to provide entertainment for your children a one-hour circus show that cost $5 maybe and give them a lot more enjoyment and support a local business. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. that completes our caller queue. >> chairman: okay. public comment is closed. and, before we discuss this amongst the committee members,

let me just -- well just the last speaker agree that we heard a lot of very similar testimony on both sides, but i just want to address some of the contentions. the first and most you ubiquitous one. my cosponsor and colleague supervisor chan, the drafting of this motion which is a template motion because so many different things have come to the board of supervisors under 4.113 that all you have to do is take it off the internet and put a few words in many and take a few words out and i think i've got about 15 minutes into this deal other than listening to the invaluable public comment that we've received and the hundreds of e-mails that we have received

and i have to say the vast preponderance of those e-mails are supportive of this resolution which me and my colleagues have received. i do also want to agree with one of the speakers mr. pillpell that he is right relative to a law which is that this is an elective body and this is within our right to consider as a matter of fact. charter section 4.113 that the voters put into place presumably because of excesses by the then rec and park commission years ago is very clear that this is a specific right that is -- that goes to the board of supervisors only in the case of golden gate parks and union square. the rest of the parks, there is exclusive jurisdiction by the

rec and park commission. indeed, sponsored by then supervisors diane feinstein, quinnton cop, john mulonari. it really treats golden gate park differently exclusively under the rec and park commission. and then, i want to say something that is important which is a deal is a deal and deals change and certainly covid has changed many landscapes, but one thing is true which is that the wheel went up during covid knowing that covid was here and it was supposed to be a one year deal. this compromise and indeed it is a compromise acknowledges that the wheel only ran for 39 -- actually now more than thirty-nine days of the original one-year term that was going to go april to april. it actually adds time to it,

but it's consistent with the original deal relative to the original money, relative to how it's still yet to be answered how the money flows for the 150th anniversary of the park, a party which has not happened. and, i am indeed concerned about mission inquiry. this was supposed to be a one year commission. obviously, that first year was obviated by one year covid. obviously, supervisor chan and i considered one year is fair. so with those words, i will turn it over to my colleagues and hear their thoughts if any of you want to jump in or put your name up, the floor is whichever one of you want to talk. vice chair mandelman.

>> supervisor mandelman: i have complicated. including the public advocate which i thought was an interesting comment by the director of the building trades and i continue to disagree that the election of another elected official in a city that seems to be heavy on elected officials is the solution in government. that was just one of many ideas that have been thrown around. as a couple of points that i want to say and i don't think they're directly related to the resolution. but i want to say them. the first is to acknowledge that rec and park is a bright spot in san francisco.

that if you look at san franciscan satisfaction with various government services, rec park is near the top. they get beaten by libraries. in a city that doesn't feel terribly well, i don't think most san franciscans have that feeling about rec park. and the other thing i would say is that although private flanth pea is complicated. i didn't think we'd have to rely on it i do think that department has done an amazing job which i think for the most part has been si terrific thing. i want to thank the people some of whom called in today. so those two points have been made. i do think people who say that the board is somehow wrong to

be looking at this or considering what should happen in golden gate park with a very large farris wheel that might last for four years or forever are not correct. i think that san franciscans have always cared a lot and fought fiercely about what should happen in golden gate park and what the right balance between passive recreation and more active recreation should be in different parts of the park. and, although i certainly understand the desire of or the feeling of the department that the board didn't need to be included in this. i do think this charter provision even if it doesn't legally require the board of supervisors to weigh in on the installation of a four-year or more farris wheel, i think the notion that the board of

supervisors of the san francisco elected should weigh in the balance of the complicated competing interests on implicated by the large structures of a nontemporary basis in golden gate park. i think that the charter provisions suggest that we should be looking at this and we having to weigh those complicated and sometimes competing interests. so when people say well all these other commissions have looked at it, yes, that is true. i think that it is reasonable for supervisors to say that we have opinions ai cannot make up

my mind today about whether this one year is the right length for this installation to be there whether it should be longer. i feel like there should be a win-win here where people stand down and engage with supervisors and try to work something out. i think we should put this to the vote to a democracy out there. most people have an opinion about the farris wheel think it should stay. i don't think because we think about the concerns of the most impacted immediate neighbors or about the environmental effects on the owls and birds and creatures that are in golden

gate park. i am going to vote along to vote forward with the full board tomorrow because i think, you know, this should be discussed by the full board and it's absolutely within the rights of this board to weigh in on this and that's my view for now. >> chairman: thank you, vice chair mandelman. >> supervisor chan: thank you, chair bestkin. and i want to thank vice chair mandelman because about how the board should weigh in on this issue even the commission.

i already said what i needed to say. after all the public comment that we have heard. i just want to have the opportunity to respond to some of that. again, i want to reiterate that i am in support of the one year extension kind of like what chair peskin has mentioned. a deal is a deal. it's in honor of that deal that has already approved for the golden gate park 150th anniversary. the reason why i think that we do end up stepping in is because that terms has changed. it is now asking for a four-year extension. make that a total of a five-year stay. i think that when terms and conditions change, it really changes everything else. and so, simply with this resolution is to ask for this

to be -- to honor the original proposal and the true proposal and for those who argue that this is really this extended stay is for the sake of economic recovery. i, for one as a district one supervisor, i think that i will have -- i should really be concerned, greatly concerned if that the west side economic recovery, especially in golden gate park especially for small businesses dependent on a wheel, i think that i am not doing my job then. i will have a much bigger problem on my hasn't to make sure that we recover beyond. and last but not least to say that, you know, i work for recreation and parks department as a deputy direct to have.

when i learned about former director of the department of public works account through san francisco parks alliance. i think for all the fellow city workers that have worked really

hard for all these great open space recreation programming that everyone is just so pleased with and serving our constituents so well, it was a shame to learn that was the case. and for the director, executive director of parks alliance come on. again, not knowing its own organization history saying that parks alliance has been around for 20 years when in reality parks alliance was not formed until 2011. it was formerly known as parks and land trust and the neighborhood council. neighborhood parks council and to say that it has generated more than $100 million over time and to somehow say that it has transparency when there are

anonymous donors throughout time. but most importantly, again, the whole situation with the former director of the department of public works. to figure this out or one thing because this is very simple. a corrupt government and it does a disservice to all my constituents if we allow a pay to play culture to fester even if in the face of all these things that we have done, good

work that we all have done is again, like i said, disheartening when someone that violates that public trust. so it's the reason why i know that it's important to restore the trust and get to the bottom. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor chan. i also want to address one other condition. there were some speaker who is contended that acting pursuant to session 4.one hundred thirteen for what is a five year at a minimum. or proposed.

and that notion is absurd. on its face for any number of reasons. as i said to greg perloff, the head of another planet last week, i would be more than happy, although this would be more time consuming to put some clarifications around the voter approved initiative propk as to what institutes temporary and should not come before the board pursuant to a 4.113 and what constitutes something that triggers 4.113 and so that is a project that i think this board and perhaps this rules committee should undertake and i just wanted to put that out there. with that. supervisor chan, would you like to make a motion.

>> supervisor chan: yes. so moved. i'm making the motion to move this resolution to the board with recommendation. >> chairman: as the commending report. >> supervisor chan: yes. thank you. mr. clerk, on that motion, a roll call please. >> clerk: yes, on the motion to refer the matter with recommendation to the committee report. supervisor mandelman. [roll call] >> clerk: and that concludes. >> chairman: so that will appear tomorrow. that concludes our agenda and we are adjourned.

>> erica wong: members will attend through audio and participate in the meeting as if they werephysically present. public comments will be available on each item on this agenda . either the public comment number ison the screen currently . the number is 415-655-0001.

again, that number is 415-655-0001 . the meeting id is 187 681 1252. again, that number is 187 681 1252 . then press pound, pound. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussion but you will be muted and inlistening mode only . when the item of interest comes up, press star 3 tobe added to the speaker line . speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or radio. submit public comment either to the transportation clerk at

erica.wong@sfgov.org. it will be soonforwarded to the supervisors and be made part of the official file written comments may be sent via postal service to city hall . 244 san francisco california, 94102. finally, expected to appear on the agenda of march 23 unless otherwise stated. madam chair. >> chair melgar: thank you madam clerk, will you call the first item. >> erica wong: item 1 is an ordinance amending the plan include code to clarify amendments. approved an ordinance number 29682 which gives effect to the market area plan including provisions for transfer of development rights, publicly

earned open space, electricity, pr for height, development impact fee, deposits and uses among others and to restore the locations inadvertently deleted and provisions regarding affordable housing to amend open space limits of mass production, lost coverage, cdr replacement and refining. members of the public who wish to provide public comments on item number one press 415-655-0001. meeting id is 187 681 1252. then press pound, pound. if you have not done so already dial star 3 to line up to speak. thesystem prompt will indicate you have raised your hand . madam chair.

madam chair, you are muted. madam chair, are you there? i show your screenas muted . perhaps the vice chair is available?we are experiencing technicaldifficulties so if the vice chair is there to pick up the script . >> supervisor preston: i am available, taking afew seconds to see if our chair isavailable to unmute herself . if not i think we can proceed .

>> erica wong: can we confirm supervisor peskinis your before we can proceed ? >> supervisor peskin: i am present. >> supervisor preston: unless the clerk suggests a recess to try to troubleshoot, given technical difficulties my inclination is to move forward. >> erica wong: we will get the chair reconnected. >> supervisor preston: lets how her staff presentation on item 1.

>> and matt snyder of planning department staff joined by josh who is thehead of land-use and community development . you are going to provide you a presentation on the essential soma legislation. we were here before you i believe infebruary 8 . you continue that so we can provide you some briefings which we've done and through that we understand that supervisor peskin is interested in a couple nonsubstituted amendments and i'd be happy to describe those. i understand they have been forwarded to you just recently. essential soma is located roughly between sixand the second street with an irregular border on the north that reaches market street south . the central soma plan included the creation of a new area plan

and implementation document that sets forth a broad range of community benefits worth about $2 billion and a strategy to pay for those including the creation of 2 no central soma impact fees in the creation of a central soma finance distric . the board of supervisors approved this original legislation in december 2018. since that legislation we followed up with legislation in 2019 that created the soma advisory committee . along with the plans for both east and western soma. the planning commission initiated these amendments and adopted them with recommendations to improve the board of supervisors in the fall. since the original approval staff has been moving aspects of the zoning amendments and their improvements. the cleanup legislation according to dataprovisions ,

we as planning staff would describe three central buckets area the first is to address inadvertent errors and incorrect suchas incorrect cross-references . that more accurately articulates the policy intent and we're here that they may be technically substantive because this policy intent was reflected in otherdocuments such as the implementation document . looking to essentially zoning codes consistent with that and then there are also two substantive changes which i will describe . i was going to show you a slide of the what we are calling clarify amendments since we don't havevisuals . i will describe them for you briefly. the first is an operating strategy . we required it in central soma,

one of the things was to create complex operationstrategy . this is one of theamendments we're going to look at today as well . the second project object pr requirements of the central soma zoning including pr requirements for new construction of commercial projects of the house square feet or more and this clarifies this would also be for major additions defined by 20 percent edition with a net 50,000 square of the pr. the third one deals with lots covered limitations as just clarifies there's an 80 percent lot coverage requirement, this clarifies where that would not necessarily berequired . specifically on levels where you have residential units that have exposure to rights-of-way. the fourth is a series of amendments that deal with solar playing requirements,

essentially south of market and throughout the city requirements for narrow streets and set down buildings, since also mucking alongwith some additional requirements . there was confusion as to which ones apply so these provisions essentially clarify what size of streets , the different requirements south of market. this is regarding the bmr fees, this establishes boundary from which the fees are collected in central soma canbe dispensed . in the larger soma geography, essentially that was established with the soma stabilization fee and the six as exceptions open space requirements. just with the central soma legislation there was a requirement that it you are unable to provide the full

square footage of open space that you were required to pay a fee. the language was a little bit confusing and is just further clarifies that if it's the square footage looking for , you do need to pay the fee. as is regarding community facilities the area similar to the bmr and lose the this establishes the geography in which these collected can be spent. again consistent with one that was established or the soma stabilization fee and finally what we're goingcalling the clarifying amendments , the soma infrastructure fee. the zoning amendment indicated it was only to be spent on transit projects , the implementation documents and this funding plan indicated that it could be spent on both transit and open-space projects so that addresses that. the final sort of set of amendments are what we are calling the three substantive changes and the first is

regarding provisions that allow a portion of the open space requirements off-site. this is also one of the amendments we're going to consider today, a planning code allows budget sponsors to require 50 percent of open-space off-site as long as it'swithin 100 feet of the project development . one of the open-space goals of essential soma plan is to look to the adjacent freeway at opportunity to create open-space and the proposed changes would help implement this enabling projects to meet their open-space requirements at a further distance and or as they originally drafted it specifically under or adjacent to the freeway we will talk about those amendments on that one . the second of what we're calling the substantive amendments deals with the provision, one of the provisions for pdr and one of the key sites as you recall. the soma legislation identified

three key sites, these were large sites which we could allow for some flexibility in the developments with exchange for some additional community benefits.one of those sites located at 598 grams which is the location of one ofthe new parts , what we heard after the approval on both the central soma plan and actually entitlements for this particular project where they have p.d.r. requirements was an interest of being more community servingretail location . this provision would allow the project to exchange up to 15,000 square feet of retail for that p.d.r. and we should note the types of retail are very specifically defined within the code amendments. and the final and third substantive change is regarding the residual exposure requirements to the essential soma. exposure deals with a dwelling

unit having like access. the exposure requirements as they are in the planning code are really gearedtowards less tense development . we revised and tailored the exposure requirements for central soma as described within the ordinance. supervisors, this concludes my presentation . again i'm joined by josh ritchie if you would like i will leave you to him for this amendment. >> supervisor preston: can you repeat the last thing you said western mark. >> matt snyder: i described all the amendments and i was indicating if you would like i will read into the record the proposed amendments that we discussed with supervisor peskin for the record that are now before you.

>> supervisor preston: thank you and supervisor peskin, i couldturn the floor over to you thanks for your work on these traditional amendments . >> supervisor peskin: thank you acting chair preston advantage to mister snyder and i want to startby clarifying what happened when thiswas heard . a while back . just through the transition from when i left in december and two when chair melgar took up in january of that was lost in translation but i did subsequently get everything and very much appreciate that everything. that led to a conversation that has resulted in the amendments thatmister snyder just addressed . which there was a little bit of a misunderstanding and i thought that plan had been

givento the city attorney . any event the city attorney has had a chance, thank you vicki wong for putting your eyes on the amendmentsthis morning early this afternoon . and i am happy to make those amendments which have been described by mister snyder and are before you colleagues with regard to proximity in the eastern neighborhoods. mixed-use district section two within half a mile of said principal project language so strike the words within a half-mile of said principal project or any parcel that is immediately adjacent to interstate 80 and within the boundaries of central melgar plan area, strike that language and replace it with within the central soma plan area were no greater than one quarter mile outside the central soma area boundary without regard to distance from the principal

project area the distance of the off-site open-space shall be measured by the closest boundary of the principal project or as applicable to the closest edge of the central soma plan boundary and the closestportion of the off-site open-space that the first amendment i would like to offer . the second one isin subsection f , open-space provider. that last sentence in provision in subsection 3 would be changed to read as follows. operation and maintenance of this open-space shall be memorialized by a operation strategy developed by the project sponsor open-space provider. a draft of said strategy shall be presented to the planning commission by way of authorization ofplanning code section 321 applies . in all cases said strategy seldom approved bythe director

of prior planning department approval of the site for building permit . that includes the amendments thati would like to move after public comment . >> supervisor preston: thank yousupervisor covid and are those your understanding substantive ? >> supervisor peskin: i would defer to cancel. i defer to deputy city internal attorney jensen or pearson . >> this is deputy city attorney jensen and those are not substantive and do not require blowback. >> supervisor preston: unless there are additional comments let's open it up for public comment.>> erica wong: checking to see if there are any colors in view.

could you let us know if there are any colors ready? if you have not done so please press star 3 to be added to the q4 item number one . for those on hold continue to hold until it indicatesyou have been on muted . confirm wehave any colors into ? there are no callers into. >> supervisor preston: thank you madame clerk. supervisor peskin would you like to move your amendment. >> supervisor peskin: i would like to use , move the amendment before you and chair melgar thank mister snyder and the planning department and thanked the city attorney for their quick review of that.

[please stand by] >> public comment is closed.

and supervisor melgar, i'm not sure where you picked up. turning the gavel back over to you. >> supervisor melgar: i just want to say thank you so much supervisor peskin. thank you so much. i ask clerk major if you could please call the next items two and three together. >> clerk: so we haven't voted on the item. >> supervisor melgar: i'm so sorry. okay. let's vote. did someone make a motion? >> we voted right when you joined on the amendment that supervisor peskin put forward. the item has been amended. >> supervisor melgar: i see. i thought i was voting on the entire thing. since we passed the amendment.

can someone make a motion. >> madam chair, i'd be happy to move the item with positive recommendation. >> supervisor melgar: thank you. madam clerk, please call the role. >> clerk: the motion is stated by supervisor peskin as amended. supervisor peskin. [roll call] >> clerk: you have three ayes. >> supervisor melgar: thank you. the item passes with unanimous recommendation to the full board. can you please call items two and three together, madam clerk. >> clerk: yes. item number two is a resolution for control to require 6 months to require a conditional use from a residential care facility and affirming appropriate findings. item number three is a hearing

to receive the report on interim control to remove a residential care facility pursuant to planning code section 306.7 (i). those who wish to public comment should call the number on the screen. and press pound and pound again. if you have not done so already, please dial star 3 to line up to speak to these items. the system will indicate that you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates that you have been unmuted until we get to public comment. madam chair. >> chairman: thank you so much. i think we were joined by

supervisor mandelman to hear some remarks. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. can you hear. >> this is jacob on behalf of supervisor mandelman. the items are to extend the existing controls. to a new reduce. and also the hearing on corresponding planning department report. while the supervisor does intend to move forward with the extension that came to our attention over the weekend that the resolution has drafted inadvertently left out some language monitoring to the controls that were adopted subsequent to their original adoption in 2019. so we are requesting your continuance so we can prepare the necessary amendments and move forward with extending the

controls in time for them to be in effect before their expiration which is april 11th. thank you very much for your consideration. i'm happy to answer any questions. thank you. >> chairman: colleagues, do we have any questions from mr. bentless before we take any public comment? >> no. >> chairman: okay. madam clerk, let's take public comment on the continuous request. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. please let us know if there are any callers that are ready. again, if you would like to line up for these two items, please press star, to be added to the queue and we will unmute you on our end. is there any callers in queue? >> there are no callers currently in the cue. >> clerk: thank you. >> chairman: okay.

thank you so much. seeing no callers. public comment is now closed. colleagues, can we have a motion to continue items two and three to the next meeting which is monday, march 22nd. >> so moved. preston. >> chairman: great. madam clerk, can you please call the roll. >> clerk: on the motion as stated. [roll call] >> clerk: you have three ayes. >> chairman: thank you. the motion passes. madam clerk, are there any other items before us today? >> clerk: there is no further business but just for the record, since we are on audio item two and three are continued next week. >> chairman: thank you so much and thank you all very much for

your patience with our technical difficulties and thank you to the staff for your heroic efforts to make this happen. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. >> thank you.

>> my name is holly i'm been in enterprise software training for 10 years that expired film and art and voice-over week work and all kinds of work. >> i'm jane a program director for the state of california i have the privilege of working on special technology projects for the depth of the technology a passion for helping people and a passion for doing work that makes a difference and makes me feel good at night and i think about what i did today and helping every single person in the city as. >> a technology professional a need for more women and more

women in leadership roles the diversity and the leadership pipeline is an area that needs a little bit of love. >> a lot of love. >> a whole lost love. >> i'll contribute for the change for women's equality by showing up and demonstrating that the face of success schizophrenia came come in a variety of corresponds. >> they're a lot of roadblocks for san francisco when it comes to our proposition and finding a play for information that has how to start and grow management so we started to build the san francisco business portal not just consults or the taxpayers and voters they're actually customers we are the government serving the consumers in our neighborhood i point to at least

one best that i personally touched with one way or another and makes me feel good about the projects like the business portal and in embarking on this new exciting journey of finding better and efficient ways to deliver services to san franciscans i sit through a lot of senior management meetings i'm the only woman in the room i know that our c i o is tried to recruit for women and a male dominated environment. >> i've felt unbounded and inspired to pursue a lot of things over time i recognize to be cricked in ways i didn't anticipate you know i've followed the

calling but now put me in a position to spend most of my time doing things i love this is the whole point; right? you ought to feel inspired in our work and found opportunities to have you're work put you in service for others and happy doing what you're spending so much time. >> my father was a journalist lift and my mom a teacher when we finally decided to give up their lives because of me and now i actually get to serve the city and county of san francisco it makes me feel really, really good not this didn't happen overnight i've worked my entire life to get to this point and much more to learn and i have a lot of changes ahead.

>> really think about what moves you what you're pat's about and trust that you are sufficient and enough where you are to begin and then is her that you are being tenacious about getting to the next place in the evolution but by all means start with you are and know that's enough >> good morning. this meet willing come to order. welcome to the thursday, march 18, 2021 meeting of the government audit and oversight committee. i'm supervisor dean preston t

chair of this committee and i am joined by vice chair connie chan and committee member supervisor rafael mandelman. thank you to the committee's clerk, john carroll and to sfgov tv for staffing this meeting. do you have any announcements? >> yes, thank you, mr. chair. in order to protect the public and board members and city employees during the covid-19 emergency, the board of chambers and committee room are closed. this is taken pursuant to all various local, state and federal orders, declarations and directives. committee members are attending this meeting through video conference and will participate in the meetings to the same extent as if they're physically present. public comment will be available for each item on this agenda. both san francisco cable channel 26 and sfgov tv.org. your opportunity to speak and provide your public comment during the public comment periods will be available to you via phone by calling

415-565-0001. once you've kexed and prompted, enter the meeting i.d. for today's meeting, which is 1873339471. then press pound twice to be connected to the meeting. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussions but will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, dial star followed by 3 to be added to the speaker line. a system prompt will indicate that you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your radio, television or streaming advice. everyone must account for time delays and speaking discrepancies that we may encounter. alternative maw you may submit your public comment in -- >> [inaudible]. >> i'm john carroll, my e-mail

address is john.carroll@sfgov.org. please submit your public comment via e-mail. it will be included in the legislative file as part of the matter. your written comments can be sent to our office in city hall by u.s. postal service. our address is 1 dr. carlton goodlett place room 244, san francisco, california, 49102. one additional issue, mr. chair, we have today interpreter assistance provided from ocea for public comment line in spanish -- in chinese. we have guests who are here to provide assistance with that participation. ar turo, could you provide some introductory comments in spanish? >> sure, john. [speaking in spanish]

[speaking in spanish]

[speaking in spanish] gracias. thank you. >> thank you, arturo. i'm going to once real quick mention the meeting i.d. number one more time. could you interpret after i provided it. the meeting i.d. is 187-333-9471. could you repeat that? >> sure. hold on a second. let me write that down. what did you say? 187-333-9471. >> sorry. i had the wrong number. >> thank you. >> [speaking in spanish]

gracias. >> thank you very much, arturo. agnes, can you provide introduction assistance in chinese? >> yes. [speaking mandarin]

thank you. >> thank you both very much. and finally, mr. chair, the last of my announcements. item on today's agenda are expected to be acted upon by the board of supervisors at their april 6, 2021 meeting. >> thank you, mr. clerk. and a couple of things before we get started.

first, just want to thank our translators for their interpretation services and it's really absolutely essential to providing access to so many to these hearings and appreciate all your work throughout the pandemic and particularly today as we get into maeser where is i'm sure will have folks that avail themselves of your transportation services. thank you very much. secondly, i want to take a moment to acknowledge and briefly comment on, i think, what is on a lot of our minds in city hall and around the city right now. which is the really disturbing surge in attacks and violence on members of asian-american community in san francisco, in the bay area and crass the country.

and i think it is a time for us to just make very clear our solidarity, the fact that we are grieving with the community, with this rise in hate crimes and also as government audited oversight committee that we remind the people in the city who are so many daily interacting with folks in our asian-american community in san francisco that this is a time for compassion, for patients, for extending an extra hand whenever possible and we as a city stablds united against this kind of hate and all of these attacks. go ahead, supervisor chan. >> thank you, chair peskin. i'm so grateful to you for your remark today and standing with -- in solidarity with the asian-american community and reminding our city government

and, you know, to have that compassion and to have the patience with our community. and so i just want to thank you for that remark and really it is great to be a vice chair of the government audit and oversight committee that really allow me to represent my constituents in the region and also my other hat as, you know, a chinese-american woman who elected on the board of supervisors and a member of this committee and to hold our city departments accountable and to make sure that, as a city, we provide equitable services serving all of our community, asian-american, a.p.i. communities and communities of colour and immigrant communities. we have contributed to the diversity and the greatness of san francisco. and that it is time for us to

make sure that we do care for those who have contributed for generations to san francisco. so, thank you. >> thank you. supervisor mandelman? >> thank you, chair preston. thank yous for your comments and associate myself with them. >> thank you. mr. clerk, we're going to take the a agenda today a little out of order. if you could call the item 2 through 4, the litigation items first, please. >> agenda items 2 through 4 are the litigation agenda for today. they are two ordnances settling lawsuits and a resolution settling an unlitigated claim against the city and county. members of the public wish to provide public comment should call the public comment number. it is 415-655-0001 and then

meeting i.d., and then press the star key followed by the number 3. there may be some folks who have already raised their hands in order to provide public comment on agenda item number 1. if that is the case, you can put your hand back down by repeating star 3 into your number pad and that will help us stay organized. mr. chair? >> thank you, mr. carroll. and thank you to the public for your patience as we move through these first items 2 through 4 and thank you to the city attorney for the request that we hear these initially. colleagues, i -- barring a request from supervisor mandelman or supervisor chan, do not believe -- and again subject to public comment --

that we will need to go into closed session on these items. the city attorney has fully briefed us on these items. i only had one comment that i wanted to make on item 2, which i am fully comfortable making in open session, which is just that that case raises, i think, some very significant issues around folks who are in custody and making sure that there is not interruption of their sleep and it's something that a lot of folks who are not in custody take for granted, but when you are in custody, having the peace and quiet to be able to actually get the sleep you need to stay healthy while incarcerated is a significant health -- mental health and physical health issue. so, appreciate the settlement was reached on that case and just wanted to urge, while on the record publicly, just urge

the sheriff's department to stay in touch with us around the enforcement and implementation of this particular settlement so we can all work together to make sure folks in custody are getting the sleep to which they are entightled. barring any other questions or comments, again, not planning to go into closed session on this, i see supervisor chan on the roster. sorry. supervisor chan. >> thank you, chair press to*fnl yes, i concur with your -- with your comments here and just also would love to follow up when it is appropriate that we could figure out, you know, to establish the oversights commission so i look forward to tim mrementation. i definitely think that having

commission overseeing -- having oversight over the department will really help. i think these type of settlements really was some of the reasons why we -- that commission or that proposition came about so i look forward to the implementation of that proposition. >> thank you. and mr. clerk, can we -- >> oh. supervisor? i'm so sorry. i am participating by my phone and so i can't get on to the roster. >> oh. >> and i'm -- >> sorry. [laughter] welcome, supervisor ronen. i did not know that you were on yet and did not see your hand waving and we'll recognize you now. just a reminder that even though it is a litigation item, we're in open session. so, if it is something that would be more appropriate for closed session, please let us know. but with that, the floor is yours. >> thank you so much.

and, you know, i also just wanted to thank you for making those opening comments. and to express my deep concern and solidarity with the asian community all over the country and in san francisco. this is a very important time to show that solidarity and to be watchful and to be good neighbours and take care of one another. i have never done a -- commented on a settlement in my four years ton board so if i am inappropriate, please stop me. i'm not sure what goes in closed session and what doesn't. i have to say when i was reading the board agenda and reading about the settlement, i was really disturbed. i had no idea that we were not allowing inmates in san francisco to get a full night's sleep.

and that is something that is unacceptable. because anyone in our custody does not mean that they don't have the same human needs that the rest of us have. to uninterrupted, quality sleep. that is a human right and i'm glad that we reached the settlement. as someone who doesn't function well unless i get eight hours of sleep, i'm not thrilled by the seven-hour, you know, sort of compromise here and it's something that i am now alerted to. and agree with supervisor chan that now that we have this oversight committee so that some of the practices that we didn't know about are brought to light in a public way. but i certainly am, no pun intended, awakened to this policy that i didn't know

existed and makes me feel like we need to dig deeper into these policies in our sheriff's department. i just wanded to share that. hopefully nothing -- none of my comments belonged in closed session. but i felt compeled to say something after being quite shocked. that this practice has been going on for quite some time. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor ronen. apologies for not realising that you were seeking to speak earlier but glad we got that figured out. do you have access to the chat now, or not? >> caller: i don't think so. >> all right. wave your hand or feel free to interject if you need to be recognized as we move forward and i just want to con can you are with both of your comments and thank president walton for his develop of the leadership on the committee for oversight of the sheriff's department and practices. seeing no other questions from colleagues on the committee,

mr. carroll, can we open the public comment? >> thank you, mr. chair. the department of technology is helping with us public comment call-in line today. please let us know if we have any callers ready to provide public comment. specifically on the litigation agenda. >> there are currently no callers in the queue. but there are callers listening in and there are 14 callers listening. >> ok. thank you. >> thank you, mr. clerk. so seeing no callers on item two through four, public comment is now closed can on those items and you can call the role on items two through four. >> there a motion? >> to approve the settlements. >> ok. on the motion offered by chair

preston that the settlement items be recommended to the april 6 board meeting, vice chair chan -- [roll call] mr. chair, there are three ayes. >> thank you, mr. clerk. please call item 1. >> agenda number 1,, hearing ton economic and neighbourhood impacts of commercial land lors failure to grant rent relief during covid-19 pandemic including increased commercial vacancy rates, city provided legal resources or support services for small businesses and engaging in commercial lease negotiations, local tools to protect small businesses and encourage commercial landlords to grant rent relief and possible changes to state law to protect small businesses.

members wishing to provide comment should call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 187-333-9471. and press star 3 and enter the pound symbol to speak. >> thank you, mr. clerk. we seem to have some background echoing. so, if folks who are not speaking could please maoutz themselves, that would help. thank you. so, colleagues, before i turn this over to supervisor mandelman, just some initial remarks, i'm very pleased that we are having this hearing and discussion on the crucial issue of small business back rent and i want to first thank supervisor mandelman for calling this hearing today. also wants to thank my

colleagues, supervisor ronen and supervisor chan for not just for what i'm sure will be an interesting discussion today, but just for their work throughout the pandemic. i would say this is an unusual hearing where we have four supervisors who have actively been work on so many aspects of protecting small businesses and i'm glad we could be together on this. to be a little more specific, supervisor mandelman has really been one of the key city leaders as he and i served together on the economic recovery task force. he has been one of the biggest reasons that we have been able to move forward with the shared spaces programme. as aggressively as we have to generate revenue for small businesses during these impossible times. it has been a critical lifeline. supervisor ronen has sprung into actions for small

businesses before a lot of folks even realised the stakes. i think it was back in april she introduced one of first pieces of throwsing provide rent relief with small business loans, loan fund and her advocacy has continued to this day and i'm sure she'll be addressing the b.l.a. report that she has commissioned that we'll be hearing about today on back rent. and supervisor chan, you have been on this body for just two months and now ready to lead on legislation, including the legislation to look at exthe ending the right to council to legacy businesses, to other small anchor businesss in our neighbourhood. and it's key to making sure that businesss have a fighting chance. i'm sure -- i don't want to speak for my colleagues. i know they will be addressing these difference issues but i wanted to appreciate all their work and also just say that, as

a former small business owner myself, i can tell you and i think we all know that so many businesses were barely surviving before this pandemic. and you add to that the plummeting revenues, the shifting health orders t complete federal neglect until recently, scared employees and it is no wonder that so many businesses have been permanently shuttered during this time and i think today's hearing is on the often overlooked but really critical issue of back rents. what's the path out of this? what is the scope of the problem? what has the city done to help? what more should we do? this hearing today will allow the public and colleagues to understand what's being done to help our small business owners negotiate their mounting rent debt during this time and i

will say that, you know, my office has remained concerned about this throughout and raising this specific concern with former director of oewd, with staff for over eight months and have been encouraged by some things. but overall, just made by the lack of progress of back rent debt. also want to give credit to supervisor peskin, that we partnered with him around the small business eviction moratorium that's been a real lifeline for small businesses, providing protections and a pathway for rent negotiations. but there is still far more that we need to do. i will turn it over to supervisor manldsleman with these final records, which is --

[sirens] we all know that many landlords in san francisco have done the right thing, have worked with tenants, have reduced rents, have waived rent and i want to recognize and not take for granted their humanity and their flexibility in this crisis. we also know we wouldn't be having this hearing today if all landlords were doing that. we know that many landlords have not done that. many commercial landlords have refused to reduce rents and we have to ask and i plan to, in this hearing. why more has not been done with -- by those who are charged with supporting small businesses to advocate, first of all, small businesses in the face of commercial landlords who refuse to lower, waive or negotiate rent debt. what tools do these departments need, what are the reasons for the lack of comprehensive advocacy. how do we move forward with more than just words? so with that, and again with thanks to supervisor mandelman

for his leadership, for calling this hearing, i will turn the floor over to supervisor mandelman to address these issues and introduce speaker and so forth. >> thank you. i will be brief and i believe there are other colleagues who would like to speak as well. across the world, tenants and landlords, wokers and employers have faced unprecedented struggles over the last year. hundreds of san franciscans lost their lives and thousands of small businesses closed can permanently and tens of thousands of workers lost their jobs. at the same time, there have been silver linings, san franciscans have by their collective sacrifice saved thousands and tens of thousands of lives and san franciscans have come together to lend them a helping hand. residents are here to help orders and businesss have taken out loans to keep their employees on payroll and many

landlords have recognized that their small business tenants cannot meet their rent obligations and have agreed to defer and/or decrease rents. but not everyone has done that. i've called for this hearing because i have begun to hear from small businesses as i know many of you have. beloved in their neighbourhoods who, despite their businesses facing significantly reduced revenues and being closed for long periods of time, could not and have not been able to get their landlords to acknowledge the reality of the pandemic emergency and provide relief on rent obligations. one such landlord who recently purchased a building on market street has refused multiple requests from tenants and my office to negotiate a reasonable rent abaitment despite the global health and economic crisis.

these businesss are a delightful mix of neighbourhood retail and are queer, women and black-owned businesss that reflect the best of the neighbourhood. they're exactly the sorts of businesses and business owners that property owners should be doing everything they can to retain, especially in a neighbourhood like the castro which had a retail vacancy rate well north of 10% prepandemic. [please stand by]

>> we put in place the eviction moratorium, which mayor breed has extended many times, allowing small businesses a longer time to pay any back debt owed and small business grants and loans and we waved tens of millions of dollars in city fees. last year, in the middle of the pandemic, senator introduced legislation to end their leases due to pandemic hardship. that didn't make it out of

committee. paradoxly and tragically, this issue is going to be more dire as we near the end of the pandemic emergency and the end of the commercial eviction moratorium. today we're going to hear from city departments about legal resources and support services available to small businesses dealing with unreasonable landlords. we're going to hear about how great the scale of the problem is from our budget and legislative analysts, based on the report they have done at the request of supervisor ronen. we're going to hear from small businesses themselves about their experience with those landlords. i hope it's a minority of landlords who contrary to their self-interest and in blatant and shameful disregard for the needs of the broader community, refused to negotiate with their small business tenants. many of us on this board, i

think everyone on this board, wants to make sure san francisco does everything we can to support our small independent businesses at this difficult time and i'm hoping this hearing can advance that conversation. we're going to hear from our budget and legislative analysts, the office of workforce development, and the small business commission, and the committee for civil rights about small business lease negotiations and then we're going to open it up to have an opportunity for the public to express their concerns and small businesses to share their experiences. thank you chair preston. >> thank you supervisor mandelman. i don't see -- >> supervisor ronen. >> oh, thank you. the floor is yours. >> thank you for the team looking out for me. i appreciate it. first of all, i wanted to thank

supervisor mandelman for calling this hearing. it's extremely important and timely and now i'm just pulling up my notes from my phone. i never realized how hard it is to conduct a meeting on your phone, but these phones are pretty amazing. okay. here we are. a year ago, supervisor haney and i joined with local elected across the country to call on the state and federal officials to cancel both residential and commercial rent and mortgage payments. we had no idea then that the shutdown would last as long as it has. even then, the prospect of neighborhood merchants, unable to make rent payments and facing mounting debt was daunting. we feared we were looking at an irreversible loss of small

businesses. we quickly moved to create the help the hardship emergency program and two rounds of that were exhausted. since then, san francisco has rallied to meet the needs of small businesses with an array of targeted grants and loans. my office has been in constant communication with oewd, the office of small business and small business commissioners. with the support organizations and of course with merchant corridor associations. specific industry alliances and individual merchants. i expect we will hear from many of them today from district 9 and from all across the city. i am feeling cautiously optimistic that there are brighter times ahead with vaccines and slower spread locally and the passage of the american rescue plan. we have to prepare for an equitable and effective recovery that will get small businesses back open, service and retail workers back to work, reassure san franciscans that

neighborhood corridors are still there for them, to shop, gather, eat, and enjoy and attract visitors as we always have to enjoy all that is special and unique about our city. to that end, we have to be smart about our resources and shape programs that deliver to the hardest hit businesses in ways that multiply their impact. i commissioned a report by the san francisco budget and legislative analyst at the end of last year to understand the scope of rent debt saddling commercial tenants in san francisco. fred and cody are here to present their reports. sadly, what we are about to hear is that especially for small businesses, we depend on everyday for services and goods, the employers of tens of thousands of low wage san franciscan s, that deep hole is far beyond what the city could back fill. it would be impossible for me to overstate the damage that the previous administration did in the past year.

how much simpler it would have been to allow businesses to close temporarily, knowing they and their employees would be supported and their future would be secured once reopening was safe. that is not what happened. the city doesn't have the financial ability to offer that level of support and we had a federal government that basically left small businesses and many of their workers with hardly any safety net. the good news is that we have the american rescue plan act, signed into law one week ago. it is a broad ranging package. pertinent to this hearing today, it will bring new pandemic relief for small businesses and add restaurant revitalization and shuttered venues operator grant. we have to best apply our local resources to maximize leverage to state and local partners to ensure commercial landlords and financial institutions, and to other tools that offer direct funding that will keep small businesses in place and

neighborhood corridors active and thriving. yesterday in budget committee we passed a beginning of the package to help do that as well. chair preston, i believe we are going to hear first from fred and then cody of the budget and legislative analyst presenting the report i requested and after that i will have questions and comments. thank you so much for calling this hearing and for including me in it today. >> thank you supervisor ronen. i know we're all eager to hear from them but first roger, if you have any introductory remarks. >> just thank you chair preston. i want to thank supervisor mandelman and supervisor ronen and you, you know, for your leadership on this issue and i think you all have made the remarks that i don't think i can ask for much more.

i do want to say that supervisor mandelman's remarks when he talks about how he was really trying to help and support the small businesses in his district, because they are unique, to the community and i resonate with that. when talking to the communities in the small businesses in the richmond, very much the same. frankly the chinese speaking small business owners that really were having a hard time, even understanding their lease, understanding their rights within the parameter of the eviction moratorium. so all of that, i just want to express my thanks to all of you for having the forum and i hope that we will get to listen and hear from some of the small business owners that are either

monoling gal or chinese speaking or spanish speaking today. i want to highlight the fact that there is a tremendous need for our immigrants, small business owners, and small business owners that may lack language and cultural access to our city services and funds both on a local and state and definitely the federal level. so thank you. >> thank you. i am going to turn it back over to supervisor mandelman. my hope is that as supervisor mandelman introduces the various speakers, that colleagues we can -- unless there is need for a clarification for something, that we can hold questions for each of the presenters until after they complete their presentation. so with that, supervisor mandelman, the floor is yours. >> thank you chair preston.

as supervisor ronen indicated, our first presenter will be fred presenting on the report requested by supervisor ronen on unpaid commercial rent in san francisco. we asked each of the presenters to try to stick to 10 minutes or less for their presentation. >> thank you chair preston, supervisor mandelman, supervisor ronen, supervisor chen. i will do a 10 minute or less presentation on our report on unpaid commercial rent which we provided for supervisor ronen and it was just released this morning. it has not been distributed to all board members. i will now share a screen. i trust that will happen.

is that showing up, the slides? >> we are seeing it. you may want to put it into a presenter mode or full screen. >> there we go, great. so just to start with, a quick overview on where the city economy is and has been 2020. this is, i think a pretty dramatic number. our sales were down 48% in the second quarter of 2020 or $2.6 billion versus the same period in 2019. what this graph shows is that retail and food services outlets in particular were hard hit. san francisco, which is represented by the orange line, was worse off than the state, specifically for retail and food services. that is an indication of the importance and significance of

those industries in san francisco compared to the state as a whole. 38% of the reduction of taxable sales or $1 billion came from food and drink services businesses. while there were some improvement towards the end of the year, in the third quarter of 2020, food places and drinking locations were down 67% compared to the same period in 2019. this slide shows the distribution of these reductions and again you see that there is total outlets for retail and food services at the top and then it breaks it down by the specific industry sectors. so again, food services and drinking places, high on the list. other retail outlets are still effected, but less so than food services and drinking places. that's the area of focus and what we want to particularly

talk about in our presentation today and it's detailed more in our report. what we did is come up with an estimate. supervisor ronen's question is how do we quantify this with the magnitude of the problem. so there is no government agency that tracks unpaid or partially paid rent in san or not even a private source. we had to rely on data compiled at the national level and information that we could collect here about the size of our industry. so we were able to identify, occupied commercial real estate in san francisco and then break it down by industries. so you see that here. i won't work through all these numbers. the basic formula was identifying square footage of commercial real estate and then average rental rates for these different sectors. going to the national data

available about unpaid rent and applying that to our total rental market in san francisco. we did have local information and that is highlighted here. for retail that is a combination of commercial and residential uses. so you find a lot of these businesses and spaces in commercial neighborhood areas, where there is a ground floor residential space and then residential -- sorry, ground floor commercial space and residential units above. we were able to get partial payment rates for those businesses that are unique to san francisco. hotels are a different story while they have been a very hard hit industry, it isn't as simple as a number of square footage of space in hotels, times a rental rate. they are usually owned by a

company separate from the hotel operator, the hotel operator pays an owner based on occupancy levels and the owner has a mortgage to pay on the properties. so, we couldn't quite prepare a formula in the same way. so that's not available there, but we have data in the report about impact on the hotel industry and i think that's no surprise to anybody that it's been very hard hit. on the retail, you see our estimates of retail broken down by what we call single use or office and retail, so that is a stand alone retail outlet, such as a macy's or a costco. then a combination of office and retail. so an office building, but with commercial retail outlets on the ground floor. then, the retail where it's a combination of commercial and residential. so these are the second and third rows in this table. you can see the numbers together

they add up to the number on the got stop, 18.5 to $39.8 million per month. the grand total, which includes office and industrial is 19.1 to $45 million. the bulk of it is retail as you can see on the bottom two right hand cells on this chart. the office has been somewhat effected, but not mostly. those businesses have not had to shut down. the workers have continued to work, the businesses have continued to earn their revenues. they're just doing it remotely now, which is another step on our retail and food service businesses. this chart shows those numbers rolled up, but for one, three, six, and nine months, it shows the magnitude of the impact over

time and as the shutdown has continued up to a year, this is getting to a more realistic assessment of what unpaid or partially paid rent has been over the 2020 period. so it goes up from our one month estimate to nine months of 172 million, up to 404 million. the range is due to differences in the total square footage for commercial businesses. we have number from the assessor's office, but that had some limitations. we also have numbers from national property management and real estate brokerage companies and they have limitations. we didn't feel either one was 100% accurate and hence the range here. in terms of what has happened to assist these businesses, we broken that information out by federal funding and then local

funding -- state and local funding. on the federal side, here is a summary table of paycheck protection program and emergency disaster loan, excuse me, federal programs that have been provided. you can see a grand total of $4.2 billion provided in loans. many of them are forgivable under certain conditions. what is interesting, i think about this table, looking at the paycheck protection program, is how concentrated the loans were in professional and business services and what is called other, which is a mixture of businesses. restaurants, retail, hotels, bars, other leisure and hospitality, while they receive loans, it's a smaller share and even though we know the

businesses were much harder hit than professional business services, for example, which are many times the occupants of office buildings who again, aren't shut down. they are just not occupying those offices and haven't been during the pandemic. so, there is a problem with the way that the federal, particularly the paycheck protection funds were distributed. this has been documented at the national level too, where a lot of small businesses and hard hit retail, restaurants, bars, did not get a proportionate share of these funds. that had to do in part with how the funds were distributed. they went through banks for the most part and they may not have a working relationship with a lot of the small businesses but with the larger businesses, so they may be more inclined to receive loans or work with the bankers to get loans available

through these programs. so there has been a problem and gap in our hard hit businesses obtaining those funds. so this next chart shows local funding and what has been made available during the pandemic months, starting with last march. this is a combination of programs that are available starting last march, start -- down to the bottom. that amounts to about $20 million. >> that's a reminder to everyone that is the 10 minute clock. just to let you know. >> i'm just quickly say that the amount available has helped, but it's been very small relative to the need, about 9.4% of applicants got funds. there are new funds pending on the mayor's relief grant and

loans. we have recommendations. >> let me just jump in for a second and with the indulgence of colleagues. we have been very eagerly awaiting this report and are thrilled to have this data. i don't want you to feel that you need to speed talk your way through the slides. so if you need a few more minutes, please take them. >> thank you, i appreciate that. i'm actually at the end here now. i think the main point is we have recommendations and policy options for the board to consider and they are -- i won't go through all of them, but they are focused on the office of economic and workforce development and the office of small business and all resources to address some of these deficiencies that are identified, specifically with the paycheck protection program and the fact that it was harder for small businesses, minority owned and women owned businesses to access those funds.

now there is a new wave of funds available. the second round is the paycheck protection program and funds that will be available through the american rescue plan, new state funding, so it's very encouraging that new funds are becoming available and our recommendations are focused on really improving and having resources available from these two city agencies that are involved in assisting small businesses to make sure they do everything they can to access the funds and legal services, which are available now to deal with leases and the commercial eviction moratorium requirements. we have talked to some of the service providers in that area. they expect -- they seen an uptick in calls for service and certainly expect more as the eviction moratoriums are coming to an end. so sorry to go over the 10 minutes, but that is a summary. you have the detailed report now in your inboxes, and cody and i

are happy to answer any questions when you want to address those. >> thank you. i did have one question. did the report include or do you have information around the average looking at business by business. the neighborhood retail, which is carrying a big share of this back rent. >> we don't have the link between businesses and the dollar amount because we were able to get these numbers using square footage of the different industry sectors. there isn't a number that goes with it on how many businesses.

we can come up with an average and we would be happy to get that for you. that would be useful. >> thank you, i see supervisor ronen, your hand is up. >> yes, thank you. fred, thank you so much for this report as usual. you do such a thorough and impressive job. i had one question beyond what i asked you to research. if you don't have the answer, no problem. i have focused on rent and unpaid rent. i'm wondering if it's in your research you came across any data around unpaid mortgages of businesses that own their building? as we're talking to more businesses, there are certain streets like 24th street, where there is actually a lot of building ownership by business owners. i'm wondering if you came across

any unpaid mortgage, you know, debt. >> right, well supervisor ronen, we did at the national level. i think there is no reason we would assume it's not applicable to san francisco. i'm trying to quickly grab a number for you. what we saw is there was quite a bit of delinquency early on in the pandemic. it has improved, but we're still seeing in place, and it's particularly -- i'm going to try to grab a number here. particularly for the hotel sector and retail, the delinquency rate was higher than for businesses overall. if you give me a minute, i can probably pull a number. cody, if you are on the line and have that, it would be excellent. if not, we will get back to you

on that. >> sure, at the national level, again, we weren't able to get local level. across all sectors, it was around 10% mortgages were behind on payment in june of 2020. that did go down to 8%. the range across sectors was significant, so for retail, that delinquency rate was as high as 18% in june of last year. it came down to 13% by december. then for hotels, it was 24% in june of 2020. it came down to about 20% as of december 2020. so it's a very significant increase on obviously the pre-pandemic period. >> thank you, that was helpful. appreciate it. >> all right. other questions for them at this

time? supervisor mandelman, back to you. >> all right. then we will go to oewd, office of economic and workforce development. i believe we have diana and denise that will present on the commercial eviction moratorium, existing support services for shawl -- small businesses that are in lease negotiations with their landlord and data on vacancies and business closures. >> hi, bryan can you pull up the slides for us? hi chair preston and supervisor mandelman and supervisor ronen. thank you so much for calling this hearing. i think it is very timely as has been mentioned. the magnitude of this issue that we are confronted with is

impacting cities across the nation, not just us. now that the american recovery rescue plan has been signed, it will give us a sense of the help that is coming to our cities. it's going to be as supervisor ronen mentioned, it's going to be really key and crucial that we follow that and that we ensure that those resources get to our businesses here in san francisco and how they get to our businesses is going to be very important that we collaborate across the board with our partners and how it's coming to us locally. in addition, our resources must reach those who are in need. the diverse community that lack the language capacity or have barriers and challenges to reaching those resources. so, today what we will share with you, we don't have all the

answers. we agree with the recommendations and look forward to studying the report more closely so we can be together with our partners and you as a board and look towards solutions and how we best can invest our city dollars so we can make the impact we want here for our small businesses in the city. today we will start off reviewing our commercial eviction moratorium. switch switch [please stand by]