had never seen before need food and have food insecurity and i think our city, this is another example of the way our city really stepped up in a tremendous way incorporating in restaurants, getting food to seniors and families that english is not their first language. just doing so many different things to ensure that no one went hungry. but now we have the opportunity to truly reimagine this and we appreciate your partnership and willingness to work with us as well as the marin food bank and other entities that have been doing this for years. the idea of having to stand in line outside often times in front of residential homes or in whatever the weather or whatever the elements are to stand there and get a prepackaged box, i is an older model that now this allows us

the opportunity to reimagine. so, thank you very much. chair, i have a number of amendments some of it is readjusting. some of it is inserting new language. >> chairman: and this is item number two file number 21067 right? >> supervisor safai: yes. >> chairman: i have read those amendments but please feel free to describe them. i do have some little questions and a couple of larger questions. the floor is yours. >> supervisor safai: okay. i'll just go through them for the members of the committee if they have any questions. the first one, as you said for file number two hundred ten

thousand five hundred sixty-seven excuse me. item number two. and then i do have a little one in the constitutal for agenda item number four. on page two, we're adding a section c. so it would. >> chairman: you mean you're adding a section c2. >> supervisor safai: we're adding a section c2 and that would be adding has free delivery for reasons of their age or other underlying health problems and then the remaining numbers change to three, four, five, and six. >> chairman: so on that one, and i might have a small clarification. i assumed that the definition of food empowerment market is

meant to include all six of these criteria and it might because there's no word after each one of those items. so would it make sense to in the original two lines of section c say for purposes of this section, having insert all of the following characteristics? >> supervisor safai: yes. >> chairman: unless. i don't want to impose anything on the h.s.a.. i think it's either all of or we start putting oregon one or all of these characteristics. >> i don't know. let's ask h.s.a. >> yeah. i think that would be helpful to have one or more. we have the space to has the

ability as well as an organization that can do the training. so i think to have a little bit of flexibility would be helpful for us at least. >> then i would. >> supervisor safai: well just to make it clear. >> supervisor safai: yes. i think if you want to make it even more clear. i would add the word all and we'd give a time frame on when some of these that might be harder to achieve are

achievable i think we can work without it at that point. >> supervisor safai: we'll insert the word online 2 having all of the characters and then i read the first amendment and the second amendment was now under section 6 which is the old section 5 would read a new section c an occupant of a residential hotel unit as defined in administrative code 41.4 and says the word "or". >> chairman: yeah. i have one question it seems like in which seems like you're

receiving public assistance or you're a member of the undocumented community or a resident of the hotel. so i think we should put "or" after a after b. it is in c. anyway. anybody can feel free. >> supervisor safai: i think you're right. i don't think you're going to be all of those. you know, you could be, but it doesn't mean you have to be all of them. so i agree with that. i think that's a good amendment. >> chairman: thank you. >> supervisor safai: okay. and then on page 3, we're adding under the administration of the fund, we're adding a

subsection that will say subject to the budget of the provisions of the charter. hsa made contract with the grocery store to consult hsa with developing the rules for the grant program with setting up the food empowerment markets and the cost of such contract may be charged to the fund

about the facility and its op rooms and that's the last amendment that i have for that other than remaining numbers now go up to six, seven, and

eight. >> chairman: got it. and thank you i'm fine with all those amendments and thank you for humoring my additional little changes. >> supervisor safai: no. those were great. >> chairman: originally, i was interested in but i think in the presentation, it became clear why the first ordinance is h.s.a. and the second ordinance is d.p.h. but it sounds like d.p.h. and h.s.a. are really well coordinated and my first thought was they should all be in the hands of one agency or another. but i think the presentation got me over that question. excuse my ignorance, but my next question is what is the category 4 found. i should have called the controller and ask, but i didn't have time. >> supervisor safai: i would defer to the city attorney on that. i don't know that off the top

of my head. unless ms. smith or ms. jones can answer that question. >> chairman: and i apologize for not having the time to answer that myself. >> deputy city attorney ann pierson. i know it's very defund on how interest is managed and whether appropriations are automatically authorized for expenditure. but i'll have the detail officer category 4 and let you know. >> chairman: if they are automatically confirmed for expenditure and don't need an accept and expend resolution, then we can remove that clause for it is redundant in that lines 21 and 22 of page 1, but we can research that as i go with my other questions. so that was a question: i

assume this one is for third party grants. is that true? is that the way -- what's the source of funds? >> supervisor safai: wells, initially, i believe it will be general fund and then it also says there might be some additional cost that could be assumed by grocery stores or supermarket businesses, but essentially, i believe it is general fund. ms. smith, did you want to jump in there? >> sure. so to answer your prior question, supervisor peskin, my

understanding is this category of funding is similar to the fire victims funds where if fires are dedicated and they can be public or private. that's my understanding, but obviously, city attorney will do more research with the controller and get back to you on that issue. in terms of the source of funds, we are looking to identify funding from the general fund on h.s.a.'s budget to launch a pilot this coming fiscal year. so we. >> supervisor safai: so a general fund. >> yes. >> chairman: general fund h.s.a. and relative to the budget that's pending before the board of supervisors, is that in there? is that continue plated? you're looking? it's coming when we vote on this next week? >> a combination of we're trying to see if there's any savings from last fiscal year that we were carrying over for this purpose and looking at our

current food budget to see if there's any savings that we can project to pull from it. i guess i just want to emphasize we do have a food budget that's focused mostly on continuing operations under covid and that we started under covid to support efforts and we want to sustain so there's not a gap in funding between last fiscal year and this year for those uppers. having said that, we all believe in this concept and so we're looking to see where we might find savings. so that may be a source. so we're looking to identify some funding to get this going this fiscal year. but since we all agree we want to make this happen as did the mayor. you know, we're looking for funding from general fund. >> chairman: yeah. i suspect we all belief in it, all want to support it and want to make sure that we are voting

for something that actually will be implemented in so far as the legislation calls it out in no particular order and says it can expand from there and insofaras. i thought it would be appropriate for this committee to ask how much does this cost and where's the money. >> so i'll just jump in on that, chair. i think those are great questions. the intent of this was to create the fund. also, the intent in the budget negotiations was to continue a lot of the food distribution that was currently happening

and rfp is about to go out as we speak and the idea is to launch a department and we're working with the department and ms. smith and ms. jones is nodding her head so that we can get a cost structure and then have further conversations about expanding this into those other districts initially and potentially others city wide with a better analysis. so we can't give you a final number right now. that process is ongoing and we'll obviously continue the conversations with the budget committee and the mayor's office and these departments. >> do we have a ball park about what one is worth? >> ms. smith, we've been in those conversations with h.s.a.

and ms. jones. i think it's probably in the $4 million to $5 million a year range. we're going to do this on a more condensed basis so we're probably going to be doing the initial from half the year. >> chairman: it sounds like somehow you're going to boot strap this money together and not ask for appropriates. i think those were the magic words. >> we've got a very savvy finance director. >> chairman: great. and just relative to the fact that the use of the fund is to fund nonprofit organizations. you mentioned great plates. are there any nonprofits in

this arena but what's the universe out there look like relative to service providers? >>. >> is that directed to me, supervisor? >> sure. why not. so one of the things we wanted to do was to find out or talk to current providers but to see what would it take from a current model to this model and we don't have answers to that we to seek more information so we need a little time. you're asking all the right questions. right now, this is a piece of legislation that is a great concept and we want to take it to the next level to get a

better understanding and plan for something larger next fiscal year when we have an answer to all of these questions. >> chairman: understood, i might suggest, supervisor safai, a three-word amendment given the ever evolving and unknown in each of this wonderful under taking which would be in subsection d which would be the new number eight. funding for the empowerment market. so i think it might be prudent to add the word subject to the funding. >> i debris with that amendment.

and that's so you don't go beat up on them when he wthey don't have money for one or two. >> that was my nefarious plan and you swarted it. and i know dr. jones has her hand up. >> yes. thank you. i'd just like to say how incredibly inspaegsal and supportive i know the task force is and the community is around this idea. once it gets piloted, once it gets launched, there's incredible support in this community for this idea of having a place where people can go every day, not dependent on a pop-up hour, but can go every day to get the food that they need. i think we should also look at the cost savings on this type of a model.

to our health care. to all sectors of society is very high and can be quantified. possibly some changes that might support some of the food cost of this so i think we have to work together as a city and city agency to really launch this and learn from it, but i believe it is the right way to go. we need to people to not have food insecurities this is something that i think is just the right way to go. so i'm excited to see it here and hear the support for this. >>. >> chairman: thank you. then a couple other questions.

this one you might laugh at. >> supervisor safai: mr. chair? did we verbally say subject to funding for line 24. that's enough to say that? >> yes. subject founding award grants or yeah. >> chairman: and then on the next item, item three on the agenda and this is i'm sure my ignorance, but on page two on the reporting departments. there's a department of family and benefit support. i'm familiar with all 53 or so agents in this government, but i've never heard such a department. did i miss something? >> supervisor peskin, agents say recently went through a name change for one of its

departments. so we have a human services agency and previously, we have the department of human services so we renamed the department of human services the department of benefits and family support. >> chairman: okay. well, that was a teaching moment. i just wanted supervisor safai to know i was reading every single line. >> and then in the fourth and final item in this package. >> supervisor safai: yeah. item number four i have a shortened change for the long title. >> chairman: yeah. go ahead and address those. so for the short title. it will read, let me make sure i'm on the right page, administrative code food security task force sunset reauthorization and date extension. so that's the short title. the long title will read ordinance amending the

administrative code to reauthorize food security task force and extend the sunset date to july 20, 2021. and the task force duties assisting with the department of public health, food security and equity report. >> chairman: so, supervisor safai, i would like to raise some questions for our discussion relative to the 2024 date that i was on this board a long time ago when my then colleague paula maxwell. i was wondering why have a sunset date so relatively short for an issue that's going to be so relatively unfortunately long? >> i think as i understand i'll

defer to dr. jones, but i understood it as something that's reauthorized every three years. is there a need to do that consistently, dr. jones? >> i agree with you chair peskin that this is an issue that unfortunately has persisted. it's very complex. the task force had suggested reauthorizing for five years. it has been reauthorized at times three years, at times two years. it is quite a lot of work when it comes to reauthorizing. so i do believe additional years would be fine to add to the reauthorizations. >> chairman: if on item number pouchlt, we were to move the

reauthorization date from 24 to 2026, will that be substantive or not? >> no, that would not be substantive, but if i may, i would like to like to add on why that sunset date is there. and that's because under the board's rules, there are rules about regular meetings of subordinate bodies and the rules say the ellening legislation shall also include the qualifications of each member, the length of terms of appointments and the sunset clause not to exceed three years. so that is in the bortd's rules of order. of course, the board may be ordinance exceed that limit, but it is really what we use as a default and where the board seeks to establish a body that will extend for more than three

years. this body shall exist for a longer period than three years. so that is a policy choice, but i wanted to give that background for why that default deadline exists. >> so supervisor safai, based on the recommendations of the task force, i would so that everybody can concentrate on the work at hand and not have to go before the board two years earlier. the good thing is it forces a conversation, but i don't think that given all of the focus that that we need to focus the conversation. i think the conversation's focused and it's going to stay

focused and appreciate your leadership on it. i think that would be a discussion as the chief's sponsor. >> supervisor safai: no. i think in the past, having shorter dates, but with this new concept and the work that it will take to implement that and oversee that and expand that throughout the city, i think that will naturally continue a conversation and collaborative work between h.s.a., the food security task force, and the department of public health and all the other parties involved. we've also incorporated in to the previous legislation a report that will come annually to the board of supervisors and the mayor about the implementation of the grand program for empowerment

markets. so i think all that together allows us to extended date of the reauthorization. so i agree with that. i think that's a good suggestion and i would move to make that july 1, 2026. >> chairman: and add the language suggested by deputy city attorney. >> supervisor safai: yes. i was looking for that and i didn't see 2.21 reference at all. but, yes, we should call that up. okay. >> chairman: okay. >> one more thing if i may. the amendments to the short and long constitute l were recommended by the clerk's office and i think there was a little bit of a version control problem. and so if i can read the amendments. >> chairman: and that would be to item number four. >> yes.

it would read food security task force reauthorization and the long title would read ordinance amending and now we will change that end date from 2024 to 2026 as you so moved. >> chairman: excellent. is that acceptable to you, supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: yeah. i think that's what i read. >> chairman: yeah. i think what ms. pierson was saying is that the actual document had slightly different language from what you he'd. it sounds like we're all on the same page with that. >> yes. i had a chance to look into that and a category four.

one is that it does allow for the automatic accumulation of interest and it does not involve automatic appropriations. >> does not. so then having that line on 21 to 22 is good. >> chairman: how do those interact? >> yes. i think it would. >> chairman: okay. let's keep category 4 and let's keep. so, but let me understand this for just a second. the donations deemed approved would not apply to a general fund appropriation. they would only apply to third

party donations or the donations could be put into it separately. >> right, but what i'm saying is inso farce ms. smith is scratching around for 2021 money for an appropriation that's part of the 20212022 budget those would not be in any event would not be deemed, would not require an accept and expend resolution because they're general fund dollars. is that correct? >> right. it would not be required for city dollars. >> right and so here's the

policy. i generally like to see where our donations come from and i think it's important. and insofar as it seems to me the bulk of the money i would lean on the side of the donations for the fund because it doesn't sound like we have anybody lined up who's about to donate and it sounds like this is all going to go to the budget. >> well, i mean, the bulk of the money, yes, right. so the donations. the money from the general fund is there, but i think the idea of that, supervisor peskin was to reference section c or grocery stores or the markets, anyone's coming in it's to

facilitate the ease of flow of that. >> all right. supervisor chan. >> supervisor chan: i don't know i think i'm kind of i'm glad that we're diving deeper in this conversation. you know, i think kind of given the fact that just some of the around public kitchen and food delivery and some of the questions around it in and around this donation always is good to be more transparent. but i too on the side of more transparency is better. i'm trying to connect the dots. i'm also trying to be careful of not to associate this great

legislation into any other possible commercial use or other purposes by possible potential donors, and how this would fund but i understand. i think that i do understand the concern around this. >> chairman: why don't we leave that as an open issue. and supervisor mandelman, any comments? why don't we move item two through four up for public comment. are there any who would like to speak to any of these sets of ordinances. >> clerk: yes, members of the public should call (415) 655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146 014 4426 then press pound and pound

again. if you haven't already done so, please press star 3 to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. and you may begin your comments. at this time, we have approximately five listeners and one person in line for public comment. >> chairman: first speaker, please. >> supervisors, first and foremost, i would like to know if ya'll have done a needs assessment in all of the districts. stop choosing four centers or four districts and then point to the general fund. as far as i understand, the other population of 840,000 and a budget of $13.7 billion and for a long time and i've been

monitoring this for 40 years that a lot of people who have been feeding the poor without any help from the city. i've been one of those. so now, in these times of the pandemic, taking into account all the restaurants that have been closed, the churches that can fulfill some of the obligations who are you empowering or you want to get people to go into a place and eat the food. do you have the ability to provide in the city and county of san francisco that has the community and cultures and different types of food. you haven't done your study

well. i've been involved with it and i know that people like to eat what they like to and they say beggars can't be choosers, but there has to be some balance in that and we are provided that balance. now, in the middle of the pandemic $400,000. you should mention that. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hey everybody. my name is patricia. i work in excelsior. i want to thank all the work that has been done to make this

possible. we've been working with families in the excelsior through our six pick up program and we have seen that families are in need which may clarify more under the working pour that don't have time or feel like standing in a line or being part of a resource where they have to pick up. they decided to opt out of the program. so that tells me we need to do more research about how we need our families and how we support our families and i look forward to having those conversationings, coming up with that concept specifically for district 11. thank you. >> chairman: thank you, next speaker. >> hello, supervisors. i'm the executive director of

eat sf. a san francisco resident concerned about food security and the current chair of the san francisco food security task force. i want to mention the food security task force has been addressing providing essential food security recommendations. it highlights new interventions, lived experiences and lifts community voices of those impacted by food incurt. and the need for equitable access. more than ever, the food security task force is essential to gaps, and needs and affordability issues in san francisco. i respectively urge the and to also the by annual food security and equity report. i encourage the adoption of food empowerment markets as an

example of innovations and food security solutions for san franciscans. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. next speaker. >> clerk: i believe that was the last speaker. mr. enial, can you confirm if that was the last speaker. that was the last speaker. thank you. >> chairman: okay. public comment is closed. and supervisor safai, thank you to you and h.s.a. and d.p.h. and your staff, ms. morris for all of your work on this. i would like to be added as a cosponsor to all three items and in so far as you are not a member of the committee, would like to move the aforementioned amendments to file number

210567 which were those that you read into the record plus the little changes that i suggested that you accepted the all of before the following characteristics of page two relative to the definition of empowerment market with the inclusion of or 6 avmgd and 6b subject to funding in d sub 8 after "shall" and then in item four, the amendments that the city attorney and clerk agreed to that you read into the record with the change to have the date be five years to july 1, 2026, with the language over riding 2.21 in the board of supervisors rules.

are there -- so i'll move that. are there any comments or questions from committee members? seeing none. a roll call please. >> clerk: yes. on the proposed amendments to item two and item four, [roll call] the motion passes without objection. >> chairman: and we'll let the accept and extend matter go. good luck on getting grocery stores to contribute. with that, i'll make a motion to send item two as amended item four item get you to in a second amended to the full board of supervisors for a

hearing tomorrow, supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: i just wanted to end by saying i know dr. jones has committed the last six teen years and i just really wanted to appreciate that work and call that out and rensz that what we're building on is that part of her career and dedicating that time. so i just wanted to specifically call her out and if any other colleagues want to sign on as a cosponsor, it would be greatly appreciated. >> thank you, supervisor safai. >> chairman: thank you for your work, dr. jones. all right. we've got a motion on the floor. >> yes, on the motion for recognition for item number two

and item number four recommended as a committee report, [roll call] the motion passes without objection. >> thank you, colleagues. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor safai. mr. young, can you read the fifth and final item. >> clerk: yes. item number five is a motion for approving the mayor's nomination of jason wright december 31st, 2024. >> chairman: thank yous, mr. young, colleagues, i was not able to discuss this with either one of you, but let me just start by thanking both of you for the actions that we

previously under took and thank mayor breed for finding the nominee that we were seeking. i had the chance to meet with mr. jason wright in person yesterday set forth in his resume, he is indeed qualified for this this was proposition jay. when i offered that i believe that he will be an experienced qualified independent spouse and if there are any comments from committee members, feel free to make them now. thank you again to the administration for finding the nominee that i think we were seeking.

supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor mandelman: i would concur with all of that, chair pes kin. i think that we've or i think the mayor has landed on someone really good for the spot who addresses some concerns that i had around prior options so i'm glad and grateful the mayor has nominated. we just recently got an e-mail from shane watson who cannot be on the historic preservation, but if there's anyone who cares about lgbtq heritage and preservation and has done a lot around that in san francisco it is shane watson and so that

recommendation means a lot to me. so i'll get out of the way. i'm happy about this nomination. >> there you go, and we've also received letters from city historical society who served on the then landmark's advisory board from good words from san francisco architectural heritage. so, mr. wright. the floor is yours, don't blow it. >> thank you. good morning to the rules committee and to everyone on the call. my name is jason wright and i'm really excited and humbled to be nominated for san francisco's historic preservation commission. a little background, i grew up in ohio and studied historic preservation at the university

of cincinnati. it really was the reason for my attendance of architecture school. at the time when i was coming out of high school, i had no idea there was a whole sector of the field devoted to historic preservation and thought i would get to work on a preservation project once in awhile and almost 17 o. those years living in san francisco. over those years, i have volunteered for various organizations in san francisco including san francisco heritage, young preservation groups and have extensive involvement within the lgbtq communicate dedicated to

historic places working groups and the arts and culture group. i've recently been involving in supporting the effort to landmark in mille valley. through the presidio historical association, i also have experience working within the federal section and have gained an in depth to understanding our historic resources. the lgbtq preservation work has shed light on the shifting national and international perspectives on interpreting and preserving our intangible heritage. having grown up gay in small town ohio and now living the

lgbtq's reality in san francisco has given me great appreciation for its value not only for the city but to the nation and the world. in practice, i work on many project types and my niche tends to focus on assessments. i have worked on historic structure reports and building maintenance plan projects and have been involved in building projects through design and construction includes preservation, rehabilitation. and i understand the article 10 and landmarks.

i've been involved in sustainable preservation for the last 15 years or so. i've learned that press observation is inherently this substantiates historic preservation and that we're not going to build ourselves out of climate change but that existing buildings are also key to the fight. i hope that my strong technical background and my interest in cultural preservation will aid me to the past current and future residents of san francisco. a couple goals i have would be to push for the city wide surrender way and to further

recognition and preservation of san francisco's cultural districts and legacy businesses. completion of the citywide survey will aid in the addition of important landmarks and historic districts. in project review and having a good sense of when materials can be preserving and hoping that through preservation to further the city's goals and further the fight against climate change. i believe in my experience and the support letters i have will vouch for my qualifications and as supervisor mandelman noted for the other supervisors, there was a late letter that came from shane watson this morning and i very much appreciate and thank you very much. >> chairman: yeah.

we all got it. >> great. that's all i have, but thank you for your time. >> thank you, mr. wright. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on this item? yes, members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item, should call (415) 655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146 014 4426 then press pound and pound again. if you haven't already done so, please press star three to line up to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comment. at this time, we have two listeners but nobody in line to speak. one moment. we do have one person. >> chairman: please speak. >> good morning, chair peskin,

and supervisor chan and supervisor mandelman. i'm calling to support jason. i think he'd be a great addition to the commission. i'm aaron highland and as you know, i had the great pleasure of serving on this commission for 18 years. i guess i got to know jason. in turn at a.r.g.. we thought highly enough of jason for a permanent position. and his work with san francisco heritage. most notably and he was a little hill more humble in this, he was one of the key people who started the preservation group at san francisco heritage. they did this knowing they could have joined the already existing group of young architects. that group was critical in executing the preservation pub

crawls which are aimed visited to legacy bars and restaurants. and this is starting before our own legacy business industry and fund program. he definitely has the expertise and the years of experience here in san francisco. i would like to thank you, supervisor mandelman for insisting be held by a member of the lgbtq community. it is more impactful for us to have a seat at the table and definitely more so than having an ally. although, we always appreciate allies. jason has been engaged and will continue to be engaged as he so well put in furthering the lgbtqq landmarks. i would like to impose to each of you four of the

commissioners are new and we have a new planning director. we continue to make progress on and i was glad to hear jason wanted to continue that. the citywide survey. the lgbtq context. the draft was in 2016. >> chairman: thank you, commissioner high land and thank you for your service of almost a decade. yesterday, when my staff and i met with mr. wright. to continue our work of the city wide survey and hope that commissioner wright will be that person. i know from personal experience that supervisor mandelman is equally committed to that effort from the board of supervisors side and mr. high larnd, do not hesitate to continue your engagement and

involving historic preservation in san francisco. mr. clerk, are there any other members of the public who are in line for public comment. >> clerk: that completes the list for public commentors. >> chairman: okay. public comment is closed. supervisor mandelman, would you like to do the honors of amending the short title by removing the word "rejecting" and amending the body of resolution by removing the word "rejects". >> supervisor mandelman: i would like to do those honors and make that motion and also just to say thank you to commissioner highland for his service and thank you colleagues for sticking be this and supporting the lgbtq community and thank you to the mayor for this appointment and thank you, mr. wright for your willingness to step into this role.

>> chairman: and before we call the roll on supervisor mandelman's motion, mr. wright, this will go before the full board next week on the 20th and if the mayor swears you in, you can attend your first h.p.c. meeting on wednesday, the 21st. with that, mr. clerk, a roll call please. >> clerk: on the motion to amend delete "rejecting" throughout the motion, [roll call] the motion passes without objection. >> next motion please. >> supervisor mandelman: i would like to move forward this item to the full board of recommendation. >> clerk: on the motion to recommend as amended, supervisor mandelman, [roll call]

the motion passes without objection. >> chairman: congratulations, mr. wright. colleagues, we are adjourned.