>> clerk: -- the regular fire commission meeting of october 13, 2021. we're going to state that this

meeting is held via teleconference during the coronavirus covid-19 emergency. you may watch live at www.sfgovtv.org and to participate in public comment, dial 415-655-0001 and dial meeting i.d. 2484-059-1749, and then press pound twice. comments will be addressed in the order that they are received. when the moderator announces that the commission is taking public comment, you can press star, three to enter the queue.

you will hear silence until it is your time to speak. when unmuted, callers will have three minutes to speak. when it is your time to speak, please announce your name, speak slowly and clearly, and turn down any devices around you. roll call. [roll call]

>> president feinstein: and i wanted to welcome commissioner morgan to the fire commission. hopefully in the near future, i'll let to meet you, but until then, welcome. >>commissioner morgan: thank you, president feinstein. nice to meet you. >> president feinstein: the san francisco commission acknowledges that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush ohlone who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of

this land, and in accordance with their traditions, the ramaytush ohlone have never ceded, lost, for forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. as guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the ramaytush ohlone community and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples. >> clerk: item 2, resolution 2021-02, discussion and possible action. resolution making findings to allow teleconferenced meetings under california government

code section 54953-e. >> president feinstein: yes, and if i might say a few words about this. we know a few commissions in the state, not in san francisco, are beginning to meet in person. however, our mayor has prohibited commissions and boards from doing so, and that is to protect the safety of the committee members, the staff, and the public. in order to invoke the permission to meet remotely under a.b. 361 now that the government's order has expired, we must make certain findings. i would move that we do adopt

the resolution. we do continue to be under continued emergency from the mayor, and it does continue to directly impact the members of the committee and command staff and those who would normally come to an in-person meeting, and there's still concern about transmission risks, particularly given the delta variant amongst those who are unvaccinated. i don't know if my fellow commissioners have any comments that they wish to make, but if they do, now's the time to wave your hand or something.

otherwise, i'm going to make a motion that we adopt this resolution, and i am seeing no hands. >> clerk: and there's nobody on the public comment line. >> president feinstein: thank you, madam secretary. okay. seeing that there's no public comment and no questions from any commissioners, i've made the motion. is there a second. >> commissioner cleaveland: second, madam president. >> clerk: i'll do a roll call. [roll call] >> clerk: the motion passes. item 3, resolution 2021-03,

discussion and possible action. resolution approving addendum to procedural rules governing trial of disciplinary cases for covid-19 vaccination policy related cases subject to meet-and-confer with the affected union. >> president feinstein: okay. is there any comments or questions? >> commissioner cleaveland: i move that we accept the resolution.

>> commissioner covington: i second. >> clerk: i'll do a roll call. [roll call] >> clerk: the motion passes. item 6, general public comment. members of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes on any matter within the commission's jurisdiction that does not appear on the agenda. speakers shall address their remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or department personnel. commissioners are not to enter into debate or discussion with a speaker. the lack of a response by the commissioners or department personnel does not necessary constitute agreement with or support of statements made during public comment. and there are no callers on the public comment line. >> president feinstein: all right. public comment is closed.

>> clerk: item. item 5, approval of the minutes, discussion and possible action. discussion and possible action to approve meeting minutes from the regular meeting on september 22, 2021. >> president feinstein: all right. is there any public comment? >> clerk: there is no public comment. >> president feinstein: okay. public comment shall be closed. commissioner covington. >> commissioner covington: yes, madam president. there were some comments that i made to commissioner nakajo regarding the money going out, and i think without the statements that commissioner nakajo said -- without context,

i don't think that the minutes are robust enough. >> president feinstein: do you wish to propose some amending language? >> commissioner covington: no, i don't have any amendment language, i just would like it to be more of a lead-in to what it is that i was saying, and that right now, there is no context. it just comes out of -- out of thin air. >> president feinstein: dow wish to have us continue this matter so the minutes can be amended to address your concerns and voted on at the next meeting. >> commissioner covington: okay. that would be helpful. >> president feinstein: is there any opposition from any of the commissioners to doing so? all right. the matter will be continued until the next meeting, and

thank you, madam secretary, for making those amendments. >> commissioner covington: thank you. >> clerk: item 6, chief of department's report. report from chief of department, jeanine nicholson on current issues, activities, and events within the department since the fire commission meeting on september 22, 2021, including budget, academies, special events, communications and outreach to other government agencies and the public. report from operations, deputy chief bryan rubenstein, overall field operations, including greater alarm fires, emergency medical services, bureau of fire prevention and investigation, homeland

security and airport division. >> greeting and salutations, commissioners. welcome, commissioner morgan, to the team. i am chief jeanine nicholson. okay. so the good news is covid has been decreased in the city. at this time, we have -- still have 15 members in the department that are off with covid. ten of those are long-term, more than 30 days, and five of them are less than 30 days. vaccination was extended for our members -- vaccination due date, and it was due today, so we've been very communicative with our members, and those that are not fully vaccinated

today are not permitted to enter the fire station at this point. as of today, we have approximately 41 members that are noncompliant. that does not include folks that are off on disability or fmla. that is just the noncompliance active members at this time, so we've really done a great job. i want to thank the team internally, everyone who has worked on this to get the numbers down, and folks are

welcome to get vaccinated. as of today, we have six members of administration that are not vaccinated. it has been a busy few weeks. we saw the return of fleet week, which was a huge success for the city and for the department, as well. there were a whole lot of people out there, and i attended the parade of ships,

which was led by our fireboats and st. francis, and it looked tiny compared to some of the other ships in the bay. i also attended a [indiscernible] and i want to thank all the members and command staff in the field and e.m.s. for stepping up and making fleet week a success and really taking care of the city and the people in it. i also attended the italian heritage parade on sunday, and that is where i ran into commissioner cleaveland, and that was actually a pretty fun

parade, and a lot of love out there for the fire department. my command staff and i have met a lot of recruits for the class that should begin in january, and i have the last round of meet and greets today, and the meeting was all sorts of young people from all sorts of backgrounds, and these young people, you know, really infused some energy and some hope into conversations, which was wonderful. chief tong and her team have been spending a sufficient amount of time meeting people

[indiscernible] both meetings were successful, and we are committed to working together to move the department forward in a positive way. and finally, i met with supervisor safai from district 11, where we discussed working with the department of human resources to look at moving toward a new testing method. you may remember last year, the supervisor called for a hearing to discuss diversity in the department and how we can continue to make strides in terms of equity in our processes, and so i assured the supervisor that we're working hand in hand with d.h.r. to go in a different direction with testing. and i know that assistant

deputy chief peoples is working with d.h.r. and commissioners, as you know, i am committed to making changes to make not just diversity by equity in an important part of the entrance and process and success within that san francisco fire department, and that concludes my report, and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> president feinstein: thank you, chief nicholson. is there any public comment? >> clerk: there is nobody on the public comment line. >> president feinstein: all right. public comment shall be closed. my fellow commissioners? i don't see any hands up. all right. chief, thank you. we shall move on -- oh, commissioner covington.

>> commissioner covington: thank you. i was waiting for the other commissioners to chime in. so, chief, thank you for your report. i happened to be at headquarters last week, i guess it was the beginning of last week, and i did see the young faces and eagerness of those who were waiting to go in to be interviewed by command staff. i told them i heard a rumor that there was a commission as grandmother of the fire department, and i would like to apply for that job, so they were -- it was amazing to see how smoothly the process was

going because there were a lot of candidates -- very, very qualified candidates. the chief said she gave each candidate ten minutes. chief, what is it that you're looking for and that we're looking for in those ten minutes to help you make your decision? >> thank you, chief covington. i'm going to pass on that as i have more meet and greets this afternoon, so suffice to say, just meeting a lot of good young people with good energy, and i'm looking forward to hiring my next class. >> commissioner covington: thank you. i didn't mean to ask any

specific questions, chief nicholson. thank you. >> president feinstein: okay. commissioner nakajo? >> commissioner nakajo: thank you. i know we have a long meeting, and i am going to wait until i hear from deputy chief rubenstein. >> president feinstein: thank you. in order to not violate the brown act, we have to be done by 12:15. we have a really heavy agenda, so i appreciate that. and i am happy to revisit, so

everyone will have their opportunity. all right. madam secretary -- no, chief rubenstein. do we have any public comment? >> clerk: there was no public comment, and i'm going to announce the access code is 2484-058-1534. and deputy chief rubenstein, you have the ball. >> i am deputy chief bryan rubenstein, deputy chief of operations, and this is my report for september.

the beginning of the city opening up, we were able to have a live ceremony to welcome commissioner morgan. we're very, very pleased to welcome him. it's been a very, very busy season with a lot of good reports about our crews out there in the field. we did not have any greater alarms, but there is another example of a single alarm fire that was managed very well by the crews. our public information officer

has a lot to do. we had our annual police memorial with commissioner nakajo and the mayor there. of course, we all remember our remembrance of 9-11, and right after that, chief of department ran up to the high-rise and just ran up to the top. here's the chief engaging the community, and we're continuing with our fire safety programs, and we're seeing [indiscernible] doing better than we did the month previous.

these are other public service announcements that have been put out at our office, social media, and they're consistently available on the web. e.m.s. is working hard towards hiring. at the same time, we're responding all over town, 24 hours a day. recently, the street crisis response teams stood up, and i hear all the time on the radios our crews calling for them. there was a bike ride, a national e.m.s. ride, where they road for many responders

who have passed in the last year, and firefighter cortez was remembered here. and the san francisco international airport continues. no later incidents, but they drill a lot. active shooter drills, and when travelers return to the crew from san francisco international airport, our crews turn out.

homeland security division put a lot of work into it to make fleet week as successful as it was, and at the same time, it was continuing to work on our incident operablity, and that concludes my report. >> clerk: and there's nobody on the public comment line. >> president feinstein: and public comment will be closed. and i can only see -- give me a minute before i turn it over to questions from commissioners because i can't see most of

you. >> commissioner cleaveland: i mention -- i notice that you had a special report on rescue captain deb gaudreau, and i

hope we can thank her for her skills on that particular incident. >> president feinstein: any other comments or questions for command staff? commissioner covington? >> commissioner covington: yes, i agree with commissioner cleaveland. it would be lovely to have her so we can tell her just how appreciative we are of her efforts, and also -- and i'm sorry. commissioner cleaveland, are you done? >> commissioner cleaveland: no, i'm not done yet.

i was really stunned by that report, that one of our vehicles that's out there trying to help people in the neighborhood gets vandalized while being in the service of our tee. my question is, did the police arrest that idiot that threw the large rocks through the windows? do they know? >> thank you for the question, commissioner, and i believe the person was taken into custody. >> commissioner cleaveland: okay. the last thing, it says there on page 21, the initial date

says 10% of our clients that we engage in who confirm with overdoses are really accepting the buprephamine -- i don't know how you say that. are only 60% of the people that we're responding to accepting treatment for overdose? can you explain that statement? >> well, drug addiction is a terrible disease. i can ask chief tong address that if you would like. >> we can have chief pang address that as she oversees that of sorts. >> thank you, chief. that is correct.

>> vice president cleaveland, president feinstein, chief nicholson, we're actually quite satisfied with that 10% number. bupenorphine is substance abuse treatment disorder. when a person is given narcan, that person is in precipitated withdrawal. they're not feeling good at that moment. as a matter of fact, they probably just want to leave and get high again because their body is so miserable. at the moment, our route of getting someone inducted with

bupenorphine, doctors are not typically receptive to giving patients. but with us, they'll write a prescription so that person can take it to a drugstore. so that takes many hours. it's many hours of discomfort for a person. the other route is if we have a street clinician from the incident response team.

what we're working on is being able to give the bupenorphine at the moment of contact, but it'll take many months. >> commissioner cleaveland: chief, why does it take that long or is it just bureaucratic red tape why it takes so long? okay. thank you, madam president.

no further questions. >> president feinstein: okay. any further commission comments or questions? commissioner covington, yes. >> commissioner covington: thank you. i just wanted to thank chief rubenstein regarding motorists following the direction of firefighters who are on fight, so i'm hoping that this will prevent the tragedies that we've seen in the past. that's my only comment. thank you. >> president feinstein: thank you, commissioner covington. vice president nakajo? >> commissioner nakajo: thank you very much, madam president. thank you very much, chief rubenstein, for your comprehensive report. again, because of the importance of our d.p.w. discussion, i'm going to refrain from my usually robust line of questioning, but i will

ask a few questions of chief tong and chief pang. i also wanted to welcome chief morgan to the fire commission, and at some point when it's appropriate in our meetings, i'm going to ask that we get an update from our fire marshall in the sense that i think it's timely that our chiefs in our various areas perhaps give us an update with participation of our new commissioner morgan coming on, that we all be updated. chief tong, i'm going to ask you a question on page 12. i also [indiscernible] to the chief of the department. i'm going to paraphrase this general write up in terms of this rescue, general activities. chief tong, can i ask you who

wrote up this general activities because it's quite comprehensive and intense in terms of description? >> good morning, president feinstein, vice president nakajo, chief nicholson. assistant chief sandy tong. the write up that you see was primarily done by our captain, josh smith. he's with homeland security, and he helped write this up. we also put up catherine gaudreau for meritorious

conduct. >> commissioner nakajo: all right. i also wanted to acknowledge -- is it lieutenant smith that helped write this up? >> it's captain josh smith. >> commissioner nakajo: all right. because this script reads like a t.v. script or movie script. forget chicago 911, how about san francisco 911? >> i'll let him know. >> commissioner nakajo: it's intense and very comprehensive, and i just really appreciate that, as well, so i just wanted to remark on that, as well. i'm going to move quickly through chief pang's questions on page 17, chief pang, if you're with me. i'm going to refer to where it says e.m.s. team six, projected

january 20, 2022. my question, chief pang, is how many units do we have in the street crisis street response and what's the makeup of the team? >> thank you for the question, vice president nakajo. street overdose response team, we have one unit for 12 hours per day seven days a week currently. we have a paramedic trained rescue captain in the vehicle and various members of the health department. it'll be a nurse from the street nurse department team,

but i'd say 50% of the time or more, it's just our captain. currently, we're monitoring the radio and attaching ourselves to any call that is for an overdose or seems suspicious of an overdose. the street wellness response team, there's a lot of conversation about what we will be able to standup by late january. it could be either one or two units. probably one unit, but we wouldn't be able to get more units up for either street wellness or street overdose until april, late april of 2022, and i could -- chief tong could correct me if any of miup

dates are in correct. street overdose response team, once we get proper staffing, we're going to take that captain off the unit and put a community paramedic in the place, so right now, we're piloting out our street overdose with a captain. >> commissioner nakajo: okay. thank you, chief pang. i'm going to move over to page 18, what stands out to me every time -- chief tong, as well -- but what stands out to me is on page 18, category of issues, staff challenges.

in the e.m.s. division, restricts the community e.m.s. division to respond to other programs and backfill. it talks about this will continue until spring of 2022. i just want to note that to the rest of the commission as well as i ask my question in terms of the staffing pattern. i just want to note that each and every time when i can get some clarification, it's very simple. i'm on the street crisis response team, and you have your boxes. this is from 9-1-21 to 9-30-21.

what i did was i looked at the totals, total 762, total 462, disposition total 388 in the last box. i added it up, and it looks like 1476 units of service. is that how i read this or do we read this this way, chief pang? can you give us a little bit more narrative in terms of how we read this? >> yes. they're not additive here. so our first encounters for the month of september was 762, but the boxes, dispositions, client engagements and encounters, those are when we met somebody. the vast majority of calls are either unable to locate, gone on arrival, or the person just

walked away, fled before we could even speak to them, so we don't consider that as an engage encounter. that's when we're able to do our work, engage in conversation, offer our resources, so it's a subset of the total. >> commissioner nakajo: okay. that helps a lot. thank you very much for that. again, my comment is in terms of page 21 in this report both by chief pang and chief tong and, i believe, in your section, 21, what comes out is you have a section here of challenges. it's difficult to maintain full staffing levels due to crew illness, exposure, false positives, and family emergencies. these issues occur within sffd and non-sffd challenges. again, i want to acknowledge

that because it's not just a paramedic or e.m.t., it's your section, as well. is that the proper way to absorb this information, chief pang? >> yes. we -- so at this moment, we cannot increase community paramedic staffing. there are a few members in our vacation relief pool that are community paramedic training, but we won't touch them until the ambulance staffing levels are stabilized. in addition, those community members that are working in our street crisis response team, we've been hit with a lot of incredible staffing challenges.

this last month, there were a lot of covid positive or exposure or illness and they couldn't work. on the health department side, they're expected to quarantine for ten days, which impacted our staff significantly. >> commissioner nakajo: okay. thank you, chief. that answers my questions around the concerns on staffing issues. madam president, i'm going to conclude my questions because we have a d.p.w. presentation and a long closed session, but i'm going to ask maybe it might

be time for the fire chief to make a presentation on that. that concludes my questioning today. thank you. >> president feinstein: thank you, vice president nakajo. appreciate that. chief nicholson, your hand is up. >> yes. greetings. we had supervisor shamann walton go out in the water and insinuated how much time it would take for our water resources to get to him if they were called from station 16 and

station 35. it was a really good showing of how long it takes for us to get crews to that side of the city for a water rescue. >> president feinstein: thank you, chief. all right. i'm not seeing any further hands from my commissioner colleagues, so i believe we are ready to move on. >> clerk: next, we have item 7,

presentation from department of public works on update and progress of station 35. >> president feinstein: all right. >> good morning, president feinstein, vice president nakajo, staff, and administration. i just wanted to say a few words before we get into the presentation. i just want to say that department of public works and the fire department have a history of working together on newly renovated fire stations. dozens of projects have been completed successfully, and

they've ranged from shower updates to completely new stations built from the ground up. those have been strategically planned, made stronger by working together in san francisco by creating a safer and more resilient city. our staff will walk you through the progress of 35, but i just want to emphasize that fireboat station 35 is an amazing

project, one that has already garnered and will continue to garner international attention and acclaim and one that we should take tremendous pride. >> good morning, commissioners. we are happy to make this presentation t you on, what was said, a very special

project. we are nearing completion of the project, but we know it doesn't come soon enough for all concerned. fire administration rank-and-file, and department of public works, working together, it's the first of its kind, and we have had many challenges that we have had to address. we've learned many lessons, lessons that will serve us well as we undergo other projects. most significantly, the representatives from the fire department with whom we have always enjoyed a very cooperative and collaborative partnership. that said, public works is responsible for the delivery of this project. whatever shortcomings that have

occurred, whatever accomplishments will accrue, they are different sides of the same coin. this presentation is in two parts effectively. the first on context that i will present, and the second on budget and scale that the project manager, magdalena ryer, will present. if you would like, i would be happy to pause after my presentation to take your questions. >> president feinstein: and forgive me. i should have announced this. we've allocated 15 minutes for your presentation on behalf of d.p.w., including miss ryer -- i hope i'm pronouncing it correctly. >> ryer, yes. >> president feinstein: ryer, thank you, so that the commission has time to ask their questions. >> thank you, commissioner.

i will rush through my slide presentation, then. you may be familiar with some of what i'm going to present, but for the new commissioner, i will try to do this justice in a short period of time. >> president feinstein: thank you. i appreciate it. >> so this is for your understanding or recollection, a history of the fire department that we've had over several eser bonds, particularly in 2010, where $60 million was allocated to a number of fire stations, not the least of which was the headquarters for the arson task force at the fire station 30, and the newest fire station, number 4, at the public safety building on third street. next slide, please. eser 2014 continued the investment in neighborhood fire stations. i won't go into the projects. there were many, many, and i'll

actually broach them a little later in the presentation. next slide, please. one of the things that we have been quite forward rgarding is our status of projects. so we have a webpage that we stock with reports, both monthly, quarterly, and otherwise, to ensure best transparency and improve accountability to the charge that we have embraced in delivering the eser bond program. next slide, please. as mentioned by director short, there have been just very many projects across the span of both 2010 and 2014 eser, but $140 million of improvements of all 43 stations, and these stations were often derelict

and required replacement in whole to ensure safety of personnel and equipment and apparatus to the calls for service, and so we're very happy with having been involved in bringing that functionality to the stations. we also had an interesting project, as some of you may recall, with the replacement of fire station number 48 at treasure island. next slide, please. eser 2020, as you know, is dedicating 275 million to the fire department for its facilities. it is the single largest sum as you will have seen in the previous slides. we understand that the scope of this funding will provide for the newest largest project ever, and that is the new fire training facility. we also expect that we will be able to deliver replacement of fire station number 7. next slide, please. the fireboat station at pier

22 1/2 is one i'm sure you all know very well. next slide, please. the project that we're undertaking is replacing former finger piers as you can see from the picture that were falling into the bay. both of these realities ensured that a new fireboat station was desperately needed. next slide, please. one of the things that director short mentioned was the use of regulatory agencies having jurisdiction, which is to say, having the power of permitting, so these six jurisdictional agencies were very formidable in forming the development.

most specifically, the bay conservation commission was very influential in how we delivered the project. next slide, please. [please stand by]

>> the cost for the non-construction aspect of delivery was $5 million, and the told, $50 million. with that, i'll pause here for any questions if you would like to ask, or i'll just directly usher in mag magdelana. >> i think it would be important to hear the entire presentation, so we don't we proceed with >> thank you, charles. commissioners, madam president, fire chief, i'm the project manager of fire station 35, and i was

assigned to this project after the notice to proceed. it was around november 2017. so this is -- this first slide -- and i will give you some detail about the budget impacts and schedule impacts, the most -- tt impacts. and so this table shows you how the budget was augmented throughout the life of the project. and i will highlight the largest impact from the table. these are the time constraints. next slide. so just like charles mentioned, this is very unusual, a very unique project, with agencies having jurisdiction and providing permits for the project, which we had to deal with, and these levied several litigation measures on the project

that we have to implement. and, um, b.c. d.c -- can i have the next slide, please? this will give you a brief overview of the design changes that were requested by the team, by bcdc, the building plotting and adding steel plates, and changing the size of the building. that contributed to approximately $500,000 in additional costs. next slide, please. and another mitigated measure involved in the project was structural repairs to the north and south aprons, and this had to do with public access. bcdc is very adamant about allowing the public to get as close to the shore line as possible. and during this time, when we're talking about aprons, the fire

department requested that the north apron will be provided to them, that there will be no public access if they needed this area for their own training purposes and housing the engines. so i negotiated with bcdc, and i was able to make a deal, if you will. the north access is not accessible to the public. it is left to the fire department. the south apron is only accessible to the public during the daytime. and in exchange for these concessions, bcdc requested that we add square footage to the observation deck. and it was 150 square feet that you added, and that is accessible to the public. next slide, please.

and another mitigated measure was to mitigate the base sale. so on the left-hand side, you will see gray areas that we removed. it was the dilapidated area on the pier at the north, where the shed was located, and part of the south apron. this is approximately 600 square feet. on the right-hand side, you will see how much square footage we added. this is the float and the access ramp and the observation deck. that is a 16,000 square feet area. so we needed to find a project somewhere along the shore line to remove the differential, which was approximately 14,000 square feet from somewhere else. the ratio we were given is

one to one. and we did. we found a project -- next slide, please -- at pier 70, wharf "a," and we removed over 1700 square feet of the bay fill. and this particular impact mitigated measure does not impact the schedule, but the cost is $1.3 million. next slide, please. and finally, the green infrastructure project was levied on us by waterboard, and this had to do -- next slide, please, sean -- with the off-site storm water treatment. we were able to install filters at the float; however that was not enough, and waterboard requested another team for the requirement, and so we

reached out to the rec and parks department and were able to provide 25% improvement to their project at marine green via as well. and waterboard approved this project and our compliance with this requirement. the initial cost was $400,000. we were able to negotiate it down to $217,000. next slide, please. and the single most -- the largest impact on the project budget was the former president steel target. as you know, the flow was fabricated in china. and here is the beautiful overflow that was delivered. and i spent a lot of time talking to the legal department, talking to border agents, talking to everybody trying to find a

loophole, a way to waive this on the project, but it simply was not possible and we had to pay. it was a charge completely unexpected and unforeseen requirement. no one could predict what was going to happen. next slide, please. and then the third -- so after the agencies having jurisdiction and then the terrace, the third major impact of cost and schedule-wise on the project was providing permanent power. and the redesign by pg&e. at this time, this is the final design. initially the point of connection was by the existing prior station. and once the design built

entity submitted a design to pg&e for approval for secondary power, they returned their design six months, seven months later asking for providing primary power. which was completely unexpected. so we challenged it, and it resulted in a redesigning, again, of the system of providing the permanent power. and during these negotiations, also, pg&e changed the point of connection to across the street, from the embarcadero and spear street, then the design entity informed us that this would cost close to $3 million, and after 18 months in the life of the

schedule. so we challenged the point of connection. we had another round of discussion. and the issue was escalated to provide everybody. the director was involved, the fire chief was involved, and we were finally -- we finally received a redesign from pg&e, and they added five new vaults, and you see "a," which is by a fire station, and one in pier 38 and fulsom street. next slide, please. and this is just to give you an idea how large these bars are. they were a lot of work, and there is backfilling and restoration of the street. >> all right. the 15 minutes is up. if you need a minute to conclude -- >> yes. because that's my slide that just came up. this is the design

builder's contract summary. the original contract was $31.8 million. the approve change orders are $11.4. but we have what we call an extraordinary change order of an unusual project and unusual circumstance built during the covid. the unusual change orders, the one that nobody could see coming, was steel towers. and then the agencies having jurisdiction, their mitigating measures that falls on the project, and pg&e redesign. that constitutes $8.8 million. if you take away that amount, the conventional change order for this project, approximately $2.6 million, which is 8% of the original contract amount, which is below industry standard. and we are not comparing really apples to apples. this is project built on

water. we have very few to compare it to. it does not compare, it does not translate, to projects that are built on land. next slide, please. i wanted to -- no, no, previous slide, sean, please. this is the slide to show you our commitment and care that we extended throughout this project. this has change orders one through 15, and design enttity submitted $15.4 million in change orders requests. we approved $11.4 million, which is $4.4 million in savings that i was able, and my team, was able to successful negotiate to get the build entity down. and, quickly, last slide, sean.

>> president: that is the third time you've said that. >> this is a lot that happened. it is difficult to compress it in such a short time. >> president: but we do have the presentation that we received in advance. so wrap it up. >> very quickly, revision one, two, and three, is all due to bcdc changes, and four and five is due to pg&e, and the yellow diamonds represent time when these occurred. and then next to each revision, you see how it impacted, so these blue squares, or rectangles, actually, they pushed out the end date of the project. >> president: thank you.

>> thank you. that concludes the presentation. >> president: all right. thank you. madam secretary, whoever is controlling -- >> i'm going to take it away now. and we do have public comment. >> president: all right. >> and... >> president: get us back so -- >> just a second. >> hello. >> hello. >> caller: can you hear me? >> yes, we can. >> caller: okay. yes. my name is john buford, i'm the president of local 798, and i wanted to share some comments on this presentation. first, i'd like to thank the team at b.c. w. for commenting and presenting. the comments i'm willing to make, i hope you don't take it personal.

it is more observation from a business standpoint. but i have a lot of concerns about some of the things depicted on how this is being handled. i have a major concern about the cost overruns of many of these b.c.w. projects. we have had other stations in which they have gone over the timeframe, which has cost us additional money, as well as have costed us this money in change orders. i know you mentioned that some of the change orders were unforeseeable, but that is the project manager's responsibility to manage the project for the clients. the fire department is the client. the local 798 has taken the time out to walk the street and educate the public and help get these bonds passed for not just the public safety, but also for the members in which we represent.

and these delays that have taken place have cost a ton of money and are already high back-load infrastructure. and so when these projects are delayed and these extra costs have to be absorbed by us, the client, while you're having many conversations with other entities which you mentioned, pg&e, rec and park, and c.b.o.s, is not taking into account that the client is absorbing these costs, which then takes away from other future projects, which are needed. when you look at the plans moving forward with the infrastructure, the bond that we are currently under isn't even sufficient enough to carry our additional needs. so i would like you to explain how (indiscernable) has happened over the past, and what can be done for us to be able to get some of the credit back on these costs and not have to absorb the costly overruns. and that's my comment.

thank you. >> president: thank you, president buford. and do we have further public comment? >> yes, we do. >> president: all right. >> caller: hi. good morning, can you hear me? >> yes, we can hay hear you. you have how many minutes, president? >> president: if the speaker cares to identify themselves. >> caller: my name is floyd rollins, and i wear a number of hats, i'm from local 798, but i also happen to be the captain of station 16 and was involved in the rebuild and the moving in of station 16. >> president: well, i thank you and i'm asking mainly because, as i think was conveyed earlier, you

should feel free to use the remaining time. 798 was courteous enough to request additional time earlier today, which i granted. so they have a total of 10 minutes. and so please feel free. i didn't mean to put you on the spot there, but i wanted to make sure you were part of the extended time. >> caller: i appreciate that. thank you. >> wait. okay. >> caller: as i said. my name is floyd rollins. at the time of the rebuild of station 16, i was a company officer at station 16. in looking at this, i realize that i have actually been involved in the moving in of two separate fire houses, and the moving out of one. we -- i was at station 51 when we moved into that

facility, and i was at station 16 as a company officer when we moved back into that facility. i was also a company officer involved in moving out of station 16. and realizing the magnitude of moving out of a firehouse that has been in existence for a long time has just a collection of equipment, the, you know, history, and decades and decades of company journals, kitchen equipment, beds, lockers, station 16 being a water rescue house with water rescue equipment -- it was quite a task. and so what i wanted to provide you all with was information that really made an already challenging situation even more difficult once we moved back into station 16. almost from the beginning of moving back into station 16, the first day that we moved back into

the station, it so happened to be raining a lot in the city. we were met with water leaks coming through the ceilings. the next morning we had our first of what i know now to be approximately 10 or 11 major sewage backups in the building that resulted in sewage running from the showers and four rooms on the apparatus floor, an almost electrical fire in the main i.t. room down on the first floor, numerous alarm system problems, a stove hood replacement that took the kitchen out of commission for a while, ventilation issues in the day room area. we had an issue with standing water with a tank under a kitchen table that was not supposed to have any water in it. we began having pest problems in the kitchen area, and we looked inside and found a large amount

of standing water that was rusted and had a film across the top of it. it took probably about 45 minutes to an hour to pump that tank out. there were issues with the door suites around the building, where when it would rain, water would come cascading down the steps, oxidation with tiles on the front of the building that had to be removed and reset. it was just a challenging time, as i said, for a lot of the members, because almost on a daily basis there were workers returning to the facility to have to affect repairs in different places in the building. i have since moved -- i was moved back to station 7, into a position that i love working in, actually, but what i do understand about station 16 is just the other day, during annual inspection, they

had yet another sewage backup, which amounts to approximately 10 or 11 sewage backups since they've moved into that building. d.p. w. has to go out on almost a bi-monthly basis to put a camera down the main line and then shoot enzymes in and clean out that line because via discovery, it was found there were four low spots in the main sewage line, which caused the backups. and in order to repair them, it was said they would have to tear out a portion of the apparatus floor to repair that, which would cause issues with the apparatus floor itself being structurally sound and maintained. it is just information i felt that as not only a company officer, but as a member of the fire department that lived through that situation, i believe the commission needed to be provided

with. everyone came over and had a great time at the opening of the station. and it's a nice-looking station, but at the very same time, there have been numerous, numerous, numerous problems with the workings of that station. and it just has provided a challenging situation for the company officers and the members that work there on a daily basis. and so to echo what president buford said, i would hope having lived through that situation that the commission and the department would take into account the issues that occurred over there, the costs of that particular station, the costs that the department continues to incur with regard to repairs and fixing things and repairing things. that, in a lot of cases, i think should have been addressed during the build. additionally the delays that occurred in demolition, we were a year over moving back in. that project was delayed by a year plus. we were a year over moving back in from the original

date that we were given. so i just hope that all of that is taken into account when looking at projects going forward and what needs to be done and what can be done to prevent the cost overruns, time overruns, and the numerous, numerous, numerous issues that continue to occur at that station. so thank you very much. >> president: thank you. thank you for sharing that with us. that's good for us to know. and i'm sorry for what the folks at station 16 have had to go through. i'm very sorry. but this is all good and part of this discussion. is there any further public comment? i can't hear you. >> let me check here. >> president: thank you. >> is that you, floyd? >> yes. >> okay. there is nobody else on

the public comment line. >> president: all right. public comment will be closed. i would now like to begin our -- before we get to the commissioners' questions, i would like to turn to chief duwit because she has overseen the problems as station 35. i would like you to inform the commission has to what your experiences have been, and especially focusing, at least today, on station 35. >> certainly. good morning, everybody. my name is dawn dewitt, and i'm at the assistant deputy chief for san francisco fire department. i joined this position pretty much early on in the build phase of the

fire station 35 project. and my experience has kind of been that since the beginning, since my time in here, there have been never-ending, very expensive change orders that have -- that because we were in the point of the project where we were, there was nothing to be done about it. changes imposed on us by the agencies having jurisdiction. point of connection issues with pg&e, all of which -- it just seems like there is a lot of finger pointing at whose fault it was that all of these things came about so late in the project. i don't feel like i've ever been able to what is going on with the energy problem. i have a lack of understanding if public works is responsible for helping put these projects together and being the experts in project management and planning these projects, why a lot of these issues were not dealt with and budgeted

for initially. the fact that bcdc imposed changes to the size of the firehouse late in the game, and we ended having to do bay litigation measures as a result, the fact that we had air foils which are on the sides of the firehouse that had to be changed, to the cost of $300,000, well after the project was budgeted for and construction began -- every time there is a fee imposed or a change imposed, we're talking tens, hundreds, and millions of dollars for every change. and every time that happens, i'm also overseeing our focus go projects that were addressed earlier. the fire department is close to $300 million in need of capital improvements. every time one of these million-dollar change orders go into effect, we lose a generator, we lose a roof, we lose new plumbing structure at a firehouse. we lose all of our ability to complete any of those

capital needs projects. and i've watched that focused budget just decrease and decrease and decrease over time. and i just am feeling like with this project, at the end of the day, while the structure itself is beautiful, we're still left with a firehouse facility with a firehouse that had has none of the seismic issues addressed. so we cannot park a fire engine on this barge. i wasn't part of the design phase of this, but it just feels like a lot of change orders that took place over the life of this project should have been anticipated and the risk mitigated before we even approved this project to move forward. and that's just been a never-ending -- i mean the first is 823.19, and here we are $11 million later. that is huge.

we have over $300 million in capital needs, which the bond is responsible for improving, and we have no ability to satisfy those needs. >> president: i'm just going to exercise my prerogative as president and ask you a couple of questions. i see we've lost visual contact with the representatives from b.c.w.. i assume they're listening -- ie so. from what i can tell from the slides that were provided -- and i appreciate that -- at least the quote is that the change orders total sum, $11.4 million, and admittedly no one could have seen, i think, the steel terrace coming back when the project was initially sent out, but

bcdc mitigation comes with every project you build on the water in the bay area. and it surprised me that, you know, if you compare that with the time table, they're coming up three years after the design proposal for the r.f.q. q.went out and could have been anticipated. my second comment to that is it was known that this new station was going to require power. and yet somehow it was overlooked so that it became a huge change order when there was no doubt that it was going to require power. and i appreciate that that atevery commission meeting

we received the sheet that talks about station 35, but, i'll tell you, it doesn't look anything like -- ie the day before yesterday, and it certainly doesn't look like the pictures that come on a nice sheet. i just remain baffled by what it is a project manager is supposed to do if not look forward and know -- you do know which agencies you need to deal with. i mean, i'm just baffled. it is like being a contractor and failing to get, you know, a building permit or building a highrise and failing to have the fire marshal come

in. i realize this was a complicated project, but you knew that going in. there were no surprises there, other than the steel terrace. i will echo what the representative said from 798, which is they do stand on the corner. and they do -- they're the reason that these bonds passed. and for every overage, i see 450 days wait, in addition to the overage -- station 16 isn't getting properly repaired. or the seismic issue that chief dewitt just brought up. i've spent a long time educating myself on this. and, you know, i just have real concerns. and i don't mean to be offensive about the competency of the

management. i understand station 49 was a totally different kind of project. i also understand that, you know, it was really directly and clearly and efficiently built and activated. and this just seems to me to be things that should have been anticipated. so i guess i'm turning to the d.p.w. representatives and say what is it that you do if you don't manage the challenges that you know are there? and, again, the steel terrace is issues -- then i read about the corroded pieces that electric stalled? electric

installed? it has to get removed and replaced. then there is a delay. i have zero confidence -- just zero confidence. i -- you know, i also am really sensitive to the fact that d.p.w. seems to get paid regardless of how much of the bond money is getting squandered because nobody seems to be running the project here. because somebody should have paid attention to the rusting -- whatever the thing was called that mcmillan put in. and we're just so backed up because of these oversights. it is very, very frustrating. and i think you heard that from the union

representative, and probably in a more tempered fashion from chief dewitt, but she is better tempered than i am. but i'm asking who is responsible for this? >> commissioner, may i respond? >> president: please. >> there is a lot to unpack there. i'll see if i can address each of the points that you made. the nature of the design built method of project delivering, as i mentioned in my comments, basically we provide design criteria, and the design is completed by the design built entity. the discussions with the jurisdictions having authority occur as the design is under way and as it is being completed. which is after the contract is awarded to the

design build entity. so those costs that emerged from bcdc, those could not have been anticipated, other than than to know -- and we do know we would have to work with those agencies. we did not know, could not have known, the extent of the intervention that those agencies would have created because the design was not certainly underway or complete enough for those agencies to have any opinion about the mitgations they would enforce the project. the lesson learned for us is where we have entities like bcdc, we could have increased the contingent contingencysome that would coule expected was needed to reconcile those things placed upon by the project by bcdc..

yes, that is a lesson learned. we should have anticipated the burdens proposed by the bcdc. thank you for not laying on us the terraces, which came out of nowhere. that is something we can all agree to agree on. there is no way we could have anticipated that. but the other aspects, as i mentioned, that only could have been assessed after the award of the contract to the design build entity. it is not as though those things -- it is not as if we had some crystal ball to know ahead of time that we could have avoided those costs after the fact. those costs were going to occur by virtual of the project that we were delivering. on the matter of pg&e, yes, the lesson learned will is the design build entity should have engaged with pg&e much sooner. that pg&e is a troublesome

entity is no secret to anyone who has been paying attention to recent months or years. beyond that, we know they can be difficult. the extent to which they can difficult after the fact, which is to say the engagement with them by the design build entity, could not have been known or understood with any precision, again, because the design was not completed enough to engage with pg&e. so it was the design build entity that owned the responsibility of working with pg&e. now, having said that, we, as a city, worked exclusively through the san francisco public utilities commission to engage with pg&e. that is an obligation that we must observe. we, as public works, cannot go direct to pg&e and compel them. simply put, pg&e cannot be compelled to do anything they choose not to do.

we have applied as much political pressure as we could. we may have moved the needle a little bit by applying the influence of our former department head, the current fire chief, the previous fire chief. we have worked every angle to try to compel pg&e to be a better partner in the delivery of this work. it has been a struggle. and i can't -- i'm not finger pointing at them. i'm simply saying that the causation of the delay with the electrification has been a burden for everyone concerned. there is everyone working hard to try to get pg&e to be compelled to work with us. their initial proposal for electrification frankly, on the face of it, was absurd. it would have required an incredible amount of costs and delays, far behind what we're currently

seeing. we were able to work with them to negotiate a less burdensome electrification and strategy. it is painful, quite honestly. so we share your pain. we share it more acutely because we're being called out as the parties responsible for pg&e's failure to deliver. i don't know that that is fair. i do know that we have that presence that no one else has among the parties that participated in the work. we own the ups and downs of this project. and we will continue to work every angle we can until we get satisfaction with pg&e, which, as i said, is nearing, but it is nowhere near enough given everything that everyone has said to date. >> president: well, again let me bring up that it comes out of the bond budget.

that is taking away from other projects. and, you know, i just don't quite understand. it feels to me like d.p.w. isn't sharing any share of the burden. it feels like there has been a lack of oversight to know that a lot of this was foreseeable. i feel as if you're putting everything on pg&e, it is the p.u.c., it is bcdc, it's rec and park, and that doesn't feel fair to me. i want to know what you all do. >> but, commissioner, if i could, we work with a myriad of entities. we do not have 100% command and control on

every participant that is involved with the work. we wish that we could have that influence and compulsion to perform. clearly pg&e is a separate utility over which we have no sway. we should try to work with them better, which the only thing i can, as i mentioned to you, do better is with the design build entity because they were responsible for the development of the work. now,there are abundant lessons learned as i mentioned at the outset here, and i think we take those to heart. no project is perfect with regards to incidences of change orders. change orders are a by-product of the delivery of work. these change orders that occurred could not have been mitigated by knowing about them beforehand because we could not have anticipated the cost of those changes, especially with bcdc. they're another entity over which we have very

little sway. they are autonomous, and we respect that role that they enforce. but the cost of doing business with them is the cost of doing business with them. we have similar relationships among the other entities. we do the very best we can to mitigate or bring in the impact of some of those obligations at a lower cost than might otherwise be the case. but, as i say, we do the best with all of the different parties that are involved with the work, over which we don't have the ability to direct them uniquely or otherwise indicate to them their performance. and so it is a tough project, as a never-before-done project before in the history of the city. certainly not nationally, even as we understand it. this is a unique project. so it is fraught -- and i will candidly tell you it is fraught with its challenges. some of it which we could have done better.

i'm not saying we're absent here for maybe doing something a little better, but i think it is important to understand that projects such as these invite all manner of unanticipated impacts or consequences. that mention of mcmillan electric did not impact schedule whatsoever. it was an oversight on their part, that they overcame and they dealt with, and, as i say, had nothing to do with the schedule. oversight on the work has been as good as we can provide. we don't direct their work forces or involve ourselves in their means or methods, which is not allowed by contract. otherwise, you touch it, you own it and absolve them of any responsibility. we have to walk a very fine line between ensuring performance to the design documents and basically take responsibility for the execution of those design documents. it is, like i say, not

anything that we don't take seriously. we take it very seriously. but, still, we will see or otherwise suffer some of these elements or aspects of work that do occur on jobs. and this was one that, as i say, atypical prototype. it had its unique challenges. >> president: all right. chief dewitt, do you have any comments? >> i guess i'm just still surprised that with pg&e being a known problem entity, why we didn't start working with p.u.c. immediately upon notice to proceed, to make sure that all of the points of connection identified in the proposal were appropriate. again, i just wonder if there had been a contingency and we had better discussions with bcdc in advance, knowing

they would need more of a viewing to change the deck -- ae costs anticipated, why wasn't that rolled into the budget? i mean, if those were -- again, if you know those are going to be problems, why then were they not -- why wasn't there a contingency pile of money set aside. i equate this project with getting married. any time you say wedding, there is always a premium on top of it. seems obvious when you're building on the water, that is equivalent. you know it is going to cost more in just all of the mitigation measures that you said bcdc would impose on us. they were huge on not wanting to obstruct their view, and that's why we had to make the observation deck bigger. again, those are part of the design. and i don't understand why that all came about after construction had started, and why -- i don't understand what your role was, d.p.w.'s role,

mitigating the risks, to ensure the costs were known in advance, and to say we don't care, we're willing to spend another $12 million, or, no, this project is going to be too much for us and we should probably look for an alternative. >> chief dewitt, if i could respond, as i mentioned, the design build does not allow us to understand the full consequences of the design until it is accomplished. in this design delivery model, that occurs after award of design build to the entity. had we had a crystal ball, the project would be no less expensive at this moderna. moment. i had no doubt this project was going forward -- this facility was literally falling into the water, putting the firefighters at risk. so i have no doubt this project would have

progressed, even if we had the crystal ball to know the costs ahead of time. on the matter of fire station 35, it was not seismically retrofit, and that was a decision with the fire department to not do because effectively raising the firehouse to avoid sea-level rise would have put that station out of use for any apparatus, and that is why that station was not seismically retrofitted. there now way to do that with a sea-level rise acknowledgment. it would have been a station house up a couple of feet in the air with no capacity to deploy apparatus. that was a very thoughtful and well-informed decision to not pursue the seismic retrofit of that station. >> i have a question then: who chooses the delivery model option for the project? and why was that option -- why was the design build method chosen then with such a unique project with

potential huge risk? >> well, thank you, chief. that's an excellent question. the public works determined the design delivery model for all of our projects. it is made through consultation with the director. and it pertains to the nature of the project. as you just mentioned, the importance of placing risk where it should rely or occur. when we hire design build entity, we are affectively placing on them the larger responsibility -- risk is an important word, but i think the nature of the project is the responsibility that is placed within what we believe to be a more synergy between the design and the builder. those are separated, and there is no synergy because one is not involved with the other in the development of the project. with the design build, you have that synergistic

design to the betterment of the project. we think we have experienced a very good synergistic experience, if you will, when it is in power and with their design cohorts. and that is why we selected design build, for that synergistic opportunity. thank you. >> president: i'm going to ask my last question and turn it over. but i am correct that all of the things that weren't anticipated have just sucked bond money away. the bond money is gone. i know you're in charge of the eser bond and you're in charge of these projects, but it seems that d.p.w. gets compensated and the money gets sucked away from its

intended purpose. am i correct about that? >> commissioner, i would like to think of it more as we are in service to the client. as the project is delivered and it is, in a sense, buffeted by the circumstances, some of which one would believe is our responsibility or not, we are a city entity. we are staffed by city employees. we are paid by the bond to deliver the work. and so in that respect, i think we earned that sum. i don't think we suck it away. i think we earn it, and we deliver on the services that are understood to be required and necessary to the project. we're not perfect, but we're not imperfect, either. i want to very much assert that we work very hard to deliver this work, that we're able to do so and render the facility that you have walked. i know you have walked it and seen it, and the quality of it, hopefully, will stand up to its intended use. it is an exceptional sort

of first in the world, if i can say that, and i think it will wear well over the decades or generations of use. and so i know it is hard to see the up side of the delivery of this project when we've been, as i said, buffeted by so many circumstances that no one finds pleasurable or satisfying, least of all me standing here before you today trying to build back confidence, if you will, in our delivery of work. our record historically, and there are some exceptions, and i know it is not the precinct of this meeting to discuss those projects that were cited because they're not on the agenda, but there is a conversation about those that i'm sure some of the newer commissioners have no understanding, and we've not been able to explain or present to you why those incidents, if you will, those project experiences occurred. if we had that

opportunity, it would be great, so that we have a whole picture of what public works can do and what it cannot do as regards assuring the performance of third parties. we do as much of the law, if you will, the contracts that we have to enforce permit us. i can go on from there regarding station 16, which makes fire station 35 look like a walk in a park or a cruise on the bay. again, this isn't about excuses or finger pointing. this is about talking about the circumstances, the catalyst for what happened on projects, which are not a perfect enterprise, certainly. but we do the very best, commissioner feinstein, to deliver these projects as near as we can to the needs and the expectations of the department. >> president: thank you. and i thank the indulgence of my fellow commissioners and would like to turn it over to them for any

questions or comments they may have. yes, commissioner cleveland? >> thank you, madam president. and thank you, mr. higarus for your report. it is a difficult situation all around. i noticed on the project controls, or so-called non-construction costs, it amounted to about $5 million. can you give a little more detail about what those project controls or non-construction costs were? >> thank you, commissioner, force that question. the project controls are, as i said, not construction. so they are the cost of development of the project. and the largest probable single cost is that for typically the architect and engineer. but in this particular instance, the architect engineer was within the context of the design build entity. the single largest cost to

the project in some total was the public works participation in it. i'm sorry i cannot give you the precise sum. the work was performed by our bureau of architecture. it was a design criteria that was provideed for the solicitations and design build entity. the project manager unit is responsible for the overall management of the project. our bureau construction management is designed to be the continue wus continuoussupervision. the work done to examine the bay waters -- i forgot the name of the engineer there that does that. there are a host of others, including the cost of administration application for

permitting. i can give you a more definitive idea of all of those project costs if you would like. >> no. that's very helpful. so basically it is the management through d.p.w., that's that $5 million cost and cost of the permits. i had a couple of questions on station 16, because it wasn't on the agenda, perhaps we can't ask those questions. madam president, can you clarify that? >> president: i think in an abundance of caution, and it came through public comment comment that we should agendadize it and invite back the appropriate people. i think we have to err on the side of caution, but we should do it. >> thank you, madam president. i would like to then

propose that for a future agenda item. obviously there are some strong feelings on that, and that public comment was concerning, as least to me as a commissioner. i followed that development, and so i would like to get more details on that at the appropriate time. my last observation is that it seems that d.p.w. goes the design build route because it is less risky for the public works department. is that correct? >> commissioner, in this case, we did not have the subject matter expertise to design a project over the water on a float. a building on a float is a rather unusual undertaking, and, candidly, we don't take on work that we have the full capacity to execute on. which is why the solicitations to design build entity required the participation of both builder and designer who had proven experience with

fire facilities' design and construction, but also working in or around or in the water. swinerton is a local firm of over 100 years in the city and county of san francisco. that's the reason why we went design build, to collect and synthesize those two skill sets into one team. >> and my final question is this: if you could do this over again, station 35, what would you do differently as the chief manager from the public works department? >> thank you for that question, commissioner. there is a design delivery model called aggressive design build. aggressive designed build gives you the opportunity to gather the intelligence, the insights, into all of those circumstances for the eventual approval

which design build does not. i think a lot of the heartache i've heard is because these facts came up after the award of the work. we could have better understood these costs before we literally signed on the dotted line and accepted the contract to go forward. i was confidence that the contract was going forward given the existing conditions, but the heartburn could have been avoided by knowing those costs much earlier. >> thank you very much. madam president, that is all of my questions. and thank you for being here today, charles, to give us the 411 on this project. >> thank you, commissioner, for the opportunity. >> president: thank you. any questions from other commissioners? [please stand by]

. >>. >> commissioner nakajo: and i thank the representatives and chief dewitt, but this is really, really frustrating. i almost feel like we're in a

state of -- and you folks have used the terminology of completion, we're at the pinnacle of completion; that pretty much, it might be conclusionary, and i don't feel like that because as a commissioner, and we have the prerogative to visit various stations and facilities, and i know that some of our colleagues have done that. i haven't done that, and i haven't done that, mr. garris, because in my mind, that station ain't done, ain't complete, ain't finished. and in terms of the need of that and the complexities -- and i appreciate this session, but what goes through my mind, is why didn't we have this kind of a presentation or conversation during the course of this project? and more than that, i realize it's what we call in japantown

a two-way street of communication that we, the department commission, has in terms of contemporary brought up. what comes up for me is this is a tremendously expensive lesson learned. it ain't done, it ain't complete, and there has to be some kind of compensation moving forward. call it what you want, but this course of trust and confidence that has been expressed from what i hear, what you hear from our department, our commands level to the commission, is serious, serious.

being a commissioner for 25 years, and knowing you 25 years, mr. garris, you reiterated altogether the projects, and i know that mr. garris asked for questions by e-mail to prepare for this. commissioners, i responded to mr. garris with ten questions: who selected the contractor, who selected 35? and i appreciate that, but part of the comments i'm making, as well, mr. garris, on your package, perhaps you're not knowledgeable, but on the package, there was a sheet called projects managed by san francisco department of public works key indicators, and i tried to follow it and read it

from an amateurist layman point of view. i appreciate commissioner cleaveland because he's so well versed in construction and in terms of his professional experience. but at the bottom, it says indicators, one, two, three, four, five, six. includes 5.1 for soil conditions. i'll go on, 8.1, mitigation measures, pg&e redesign. four, forecast substantial completions based on designer. basically, mr. garrison, is i had to put up those indicators

and try to match it up with the stations on this chart, stations 5, 16, and 35, and it becomes tremendously indicated at the overrun, if you will, falls within the range of station 35 of this agenda item. and again, being an amateurist type of individual, i did the arithmetic on that. when it comes to all of these indicative repairs that our station needs that's over 150 years old, what comes about on a budgetary issue with our department is how do we get the finances for everything that's

needed on this station? mr. garrison, the answer is the eser bond, and i had to learn the campaign and the heart break in terms of all the hard work that has occurred from the local membership of 798, our members standing on street corners, but basically, the citizens of san francisco that approved those bonds. those bonds, in my opinion as a commissioner, are godsend funds. and the responsibility of this bond is to get this project done. this agenda indicates we need to have a continuing dialogue with the department in terms of what we've done and what we've accomplished in terms of the change orders, but i've concern

because we talked about the building being a legacy building. that's how long it's got to be stand and be functional. and with our colleagues on this commission, that's our responsibility, as well. so to me, this discussion, it's a hell of an expensive lesson learned if we're talking about all of this in terms of mitigation. and again, i appreciate the presentation in terms of overrun, but it sure makes me feel that we've really got to build on our communication, our coordination. i'm going to stop there because i think particularly a lot of

things have been expressed as part of this scenario, and 25 years in this city, i've had the privilege and honor of being a fire commissioner, and to have an opportunity to get educated. and for me to get educated, all of the members of this department that had something to do with this scenario, which i wish i'd said something about in 15 and 16 when this came out. and i know, mr. garrison, that you served as a commissioner, as well, and you understand the kind of oversight that we're requiring, but director short, if we don't get some confidence and trust moving forward, and in your questions that i asked for your answers to my question, i asked, who selects the project manager, what are the circumstances for it to

occur? i'm going to stop right there. appreciate that you're here. somewhere along the line, we're going to be paying attention from this point moving forward. director short, i feel the pressure, as you do, mr. garris. in my language, we better make things right, and we better start communicating with each other. some of these subject matters with 15 and 16, i think we better flush it out and create good working relationships. >> president feinstein: thank you, commissioner nakajo. >> president feinstein, may i respond to those comments by commissioner nakajo? >> president feinstein: yes. >> commissioner nakajo, you and

i met 25 years ago, when i served on the library commission, and i only served 12 years. we had a dedicated meeting to review the many projects underway being developed by both public and private sector architects. in that way, we had a continuous appreciation for who was evolving or emerging, and we could better establish opinion or counsel on how to continue that work, and it was to allow us the opportunity for us to weigh-in as we did. we're very grateful to 798 for the work they did or do as to passing these bonds and project

delivery and -- we would welcome the opportunity to engage with the commission on the particular aspects of project delivery so you hear it straight literally from the horse's mouth and to hold the folks accountable for the work to be delivered. thank you. >> president feinstein: thank you, and i want to ask you -- everybody's hopping around. thank you very, very much, and our time is short -- oh,

commissioner covington. >> commissioner covington: yes, i did. i yielded the floor to commissioner nakajo. i would also like to thank everyone for coming, and i would like to go way back in time and get an idea from you as to how these relationships, this shotgun wedding of the departments and the city and your department having to work together, how is it that, you know, the fire department doesn't have an opportunity to go out and interview people and look at various firms, but we have to come to your department?

what safeguard do you have in place to ensure that your

department is satisfied, which is another department of the city? how is the project manager selected, and is the project manager selected, was he okay with the client? >> i'll respond to that question. i believe i have the inside on it. the project manager is a staff person that is named by the public works department based on their skill set. we do not require with the department on that -- inquire with the department on that. we do inquire with the department once they are

nominated and about whether corrective action can be made to get right with the department, or failing that, it becomes a matter of the replacement of that individual because that goes to matter of perspective and making sure the city is not put at risk because of legal employment action, so we will definitely respond to any client who can provide us with their not just sentiments but their belief that a project manager is not suited to the role. so it is, initially, as with any department, we appoint our staff to do the work, and then,

we drive the work to the manner in which it's being prosecuted. >> commissioner covington: okay. with all due respect, i think that's too late in the process, the department has to give approval to whoever you select to do such expensive and huge projects. the time is takes to actually put all of these pieces together, to push a bond forward, to get it on the ballot, and to have, what was it, 81% of voters in 2020 voted for these bonds, and that's

because the people selling these bonds are the fire department. you have people who want to defund the police, but they're not frontline people who are handing out leaflets and all of that and trying to entice people with baked goods so that we can get the tremendous amount of money that we need. so we bring in the money essentially for our projects and for the police department, but we don't get a say of who the money is handed off to, who the responsibility is of handling the budget is handed off to. that does not, to me, seem to

be equitable, and it also does not seem to me to be a situation that is going to endear us to each other. >> commissioner, i would say that while that historically has not been done, that does not mean that it cannot be done. this is the first time, candidly, in the 14 years that i've been involved with the eser bond, that it's been raised as a topic, but as with everything, there's a first time for everything, so we can definitely respond. >> commissioner covington: all right. i think it's imperative for the training facility that the commission and command staff have a discussion regarding the person's track record in terms

of getting things done close to budget and close to time frame rather getting things pushed out. because my understanding is you are a project manager, and there's something that stops the project from continuing, during that course of time, you go to another project that pays you, and that's not the case here. if there is a stoppage by the union or anything like that, but something that causes a long pause, we are still being built? >> commissioner, i'm at a loss to understand what you're referencing. >> commissioner covington: okay. what i'm referencing is how we get to these cost overruns, and why it is necessary for us to

have -- i don't know if it would be vito or whoever, but whomever you are considering for the training facility, which is going to be a huge undertaking, then we have a discussion about who that person is, who that person is going to be before you make a final decision and just announce it to us. >> commissioner, i would defer to my deputy director on any matter that pertains to personnel. i do believe that, given the exchange, any station is the crown jewel in eser 2020.

the project is going forward with the necessary attention and commitment of staff to ensure its forward movement. >> commissioner covington: okay. and how are you acheefg -- achieving this forward movement without a project manager being identified? >> again, i would defer to my director on that particular point. >> commissioner covington: okay. this is something we should know. we should know if discussions about the future facility is going on, who is involved in that discussion, and how involved have you made us as a part of this process.

all right. i will defer to the director. >> clerk: okay. as the training facility is not on the agenda, we should probably keep the conversation away from there. >> commissioner covington: all right. so we'll have yet another -- >> president feinstein: yeah, i'm sorry, please. >> commissioner covington: we'll have yet another item on a future agenda. okay. well, i will stay away from the training facility. thank you, madam secretary, for keeping us up to date on that. so my question -- one of my questions is so if the work has paused on this huge project station 35, what does the project manager then for station 35 do?

>> other things. she would only attend to things that would be essential on the project, but she has other projects under her belt to administer and manage. >> commissioner covington: and how is her time apportioned? >> according to the particular tasks or activities required to sustain that momentum going forward. it can vary in the week. >> commissioner covington: so in a week, say it's a sole week, ten billable hours, are we billed ten hours, or are we billed more or less, or how does that work? >> commissioner, you have me at a disadvantage. i don't know how the time cards work in the last few months. she has other projects under

her belt, so she only has 35 to sustain that momentum, as i just told you. she puts no more or less effort that's required into sustaining that momentum. >> and if i could just clarify, i think to respond to your question, we are only billing the fire department for hours that are spent working on your project. >> commissioner covington: okay. thank you, miss short. and so, miss short, if a subcontractor or someone else causes a delay, are they charged for that delay? >> may i jump in on that one? >> sure. >> there's such a thing called compensable delay and

noncompensable delay. where they create their only delay, if you will, shoot themselves in their own foot, that's a noncompensable delay, and they are not paid any sum of money pertinent to that impact. >> commissioner covington: are they charged a fee? is there -- >> well, if they create a delay that's beyond the agreed upon duration of the schedule, then that brings forward liquidated damages, which is a whole different topic. >> commissioner covington: okay. the liquidated damages, who gets the money? >> liquidated damages is meant to defray the cost during the

time during which the delay occurred. so again, the department of public works and anyone else who's involved with administering the work during the delay caused by the builder for which we may assess liquidated damages, liquidated damages are assessed to defray the cost. the builder is paying the cost. but because of his delay, the assessment of the liquidated delay comes out of his or her pocket to pay for that delay. >> commissioner covington: okay. it comes out of his or her pocket, but whose pocket does it go into? that's the question. >> that goes to whomever is associated with it. obviously, as principal agent of the project, the department

of public works has its cost defrayed. >> commissioner covington: okay. why not from your pocket to our pocket? >> because the department is compensated of two part-time staff to the project, so any participation dealing with that impact is compensated by the bond through the m.o.u. >> commissioner covington: okay. thank you. can you hold on, please? >> certainly. >> commissioner covington: i think i would like to go to our financial director. mr. corso, are we receiving any moneys? >> good morning, commissioners. mark corso.

we have two personnel that are staffed with eser funds where we charge the bond program. we do not receive any bond proceeds or revenues directly into our budget outside of any other, you know, general fund operating budget expenditures. as related strictly to the bond, we do have two personnel that we charge to the bond. >> commissioner covington: okay. we have two personnel where we charge to the bond, and where does that show up in our information, and does that show up anywhere in the 20-some pages that we received in preparation for today, you know? >> i believe that's wrapped up into the total cost of the bond program. i'm not sure exactly where it's allocated in the presentation. it's not in our presentation, but it's --

>> just to elaborate on mark's comment there [indiscernible]. sorry. just for clarification, the costs for the two staff are included in the costs for project control. that is one of the line items of cost for project control. >> commissioner covington: okay. thank you. i appreciate that. all right. i'm looking at the time, and i see that there are a lot of things that will appear on future agendas, but i must thank you, mr. garris, and miss short, for your openness, as well, and the fire commission and department having a voice in regards to the selection of the project manager.

i think that's one thing that we have here today. thank you for being here. >> president feinstein: thank you, all three of you, for taking the time. we appreciate. >> thank you, commissioner feinstein, for the opportunity. look forward to seeing you again. >> thank you, director short. thank you, charles, thank you, magdalena. appreciate your time. >> thank you. >> president feinstein: all right. >> clerk: should we go onto the next item? >> president feinstein: i believe we will. >> clerk: item 8, commission report. report on commission activities since last meeting on september 22, 2021. and there's nobody on our public comment line. >> president feinstein: all right.

public comment will be closed. anybody -- i think the chief gave us a pretty good report on what everybody's been up to. anybody wish to add anything, any commissioners? not seeing any hands, so we will move onto the next topic. >> clerk: item 9, agenda for next and future fire commission meetings. >> president feinstein: well, yes. vice president nakajo? >> commissioner nakajo: madam president and colleagues, i'd like to have scheduled on the agenda a training facility update and discussion. thank you. >> president feinstein: thank you. are -- yes, commissioner cleaveland? >> commissioner cleaveland: thank you, madam president. as previously mentioned, i'd like to have a review of station 16s project placed on a

future agenda. >> president feinstein: you read my mind, so thank you. anybody else? i'm not seeing any other hands, and -- >> clerk: and there's nobody on the public comment line. >> president feinstein: all right. public comment is therefore closed. all right. well, the next item, i'm hoping we have time for -- i believe that we do, so let's go ahead and call that. >> clerk: item 10, public comment on item 11. public comment on all matters pertaining to item 11 # below, including public comment on whether to hold item 11 in closed session.

>> president feinstein: is there any public comment? >> clerk: there is no public comment, no callers on the line. >> president feinstein: all right. public comment is closed. commissioner covington? >> commissioner covington: yes, thank you. i move that we go into closed session. >> president feinstein: all right. is there a second? >> commissioner cleaveland: i second that. >> president feinstein: okay. there is a motion and a second. [roll call] >> clerk: okay. we will now go into closed session, and the time is

>> clerk: vote to elect whether to disclose any or all discussions held in closed session, as specified in san francisco administrative code section 67.12-a. >> president feinstein: is there a motion to keep what we discussed in closed session confidential and in closed session? >> commissioner cleaveland: motion not to disclose, madam president. >> president feinstein: is there a second? commissioner covington? >> commissioner covington: i second. >> clerk: okay. [roll call]

>> clerk: the vote is unanimous. item 12 is adjournment. >> commissioner covington: so moved. >> president feinstein: second? don't all hurry at once. >> i second it. [roll call] >> clerk: welcome back. the meeting is adjourned -- >> president feinstein: i just want to say one quick thing, which is thank you all for the hard work. this was a really heavy agenda, and everybody really contributed, i think, to make it tremendously productive and will help us moving forward, so thank you for all doing your

homework. >> clerk: everybody have a good day. is -- >> our united states constitution requires every ten years that america counts every human being in the united states, which is incredibly important for many reasons. it's important for preliminary representation because if -- political representation because if we under count california, we get less representatives in congress. it's important for san francisco because if we don't

have all of the people in our city, if we don't have all of the folks in california, california and san francisco stand to lose billions of dollars in funding. >> it's really important to the city of san francisco that the federal government gets the count right, so we've created count sf to motivate all -- sf count to motivate all citizens to participate in the census. >> for the immigrant community,

a lot of people aren't sure whether they should take part, whether this is something for u.s. citizens or whether it's something for anybody who's in the united states, and it is something for everybody. census counts the entire population. >> we've given out $2 million to over 30 community-based organizations to help people do the census in the communities where they live and work. we've also partnered with the public libraries here in the city and also the public schools to make sure there are informational materials to make sure the folks do the census at those sites, as well, and we've initiated a campaign to motivate the citizens and make sure they participate in census 2020. because of the language issues that many chinese community and families experience, there is a

lot of mistrust in the federal government and whether their private information will be kept private and confidential. >> so it's really important that communities like bayview-hunters point participate because in the past, they've been under counted, so what that means is that funding that should have gone to these communities, it wasn't enough. >> we're going to help educate people in the tenderloin, the multicultural residents of the tenderloin. you know, any one of our given blocks, there's 35 different languages spoken, so we are the original u.n. of san francisco. so it's -- our job is to educate people and be able to familiarize themselves on doing this census. >> you go on-line and do the

census. it's available in 13 languages, and you don't need anything. it's based on household. you put in your address and answer nine simple questions. how many people are in your household, do you rent, and your information. your name, your age, your race, your gender. >> everybody is $2,000 in funding for our child care, housing, food stamps, and medical care. >> all of the residents in the city and county of san francisco need to be counted in census 2020. if you're not counted, then your community is underrepresented and will be underserved. .

>> neighborhood in san francisco are also diverse and fascist as the people that inhabitable them we're in north beach about supervisor peskin will give us a tour and introduce is to what think of i i his favorite district 5 e 3 is in the northwest surrounded by the san francisco bay the district is the boosting chinatown oar embarcadero financial district fisherman's wharf exhibit no. north beach telegraph hill and part of union square. >> all of san francisco districts are remarkable i'm honored and delighted to

represent really whereas with an the most intact district got chinatown, north beach fisherman's wharf russian hill and knob hill and the northwest waterfront some of the most wealthier and inning e impoverished people in san francisco obgyn siding it is ethically exists a bunch of tight-knit neighborhoods people know he each other by name a wonderful placed physically and socially to be all of the neighborhoods north beach and chinatown the i try to be out in the community as much as and i think, being a the cafe eating at the neighborhood lunch place people come up and talk to you, you never have time alone but really it is fun hi, i'm one the owners and is ceo of cafe trespassing in north beach

many people refer to cafe trees as a the living room of north beach most of the clients are local and living up the hill come and meet with each other just the way the united states been since 1956 opposed by the grandfather a big people person people had people coming since the day we opened. >> it is of is first place on the west that that exposito 6 years ago but anyone was doing that starbuck's exists and it created a really welcoming pot. it is truly a legacy business but more importantly it really at the take care of their community my father from it was formally italy a fisherman and that town very rich in culture and music was a big part of it guitars and

sank and combart in the evening that tradition they brought this to the cafe so many characters around here everything has incredible stories by famous folks last week the cafe that paul carr tennessee take care from the jefferson starship hung out the cafe are the famous poet lawrence william getty and jack herb man go hung out. >> they work worked at a play with the god fathers and photos he had his typewriter i wish i were here back there it there's a lot of moving parts the meeting spot rich in culture and artists and musicians epic people would talk with you and you'd getetetetetetetetetett

>> you're watching quick bites, the show that is san francisco.

and today you're in for a real treat. oh, my! food inspired by the mediterranean and middle east with a twist so unique you can only find it in one place in san francisco. we're at the 55th annual armenian festival and bizarre. this is extra special not only because i happen to be armenian, but there is so much delicious food here. and i can't wait to share it with all of you. let's go. armenia, culture and cusine has had much cultural exchanges with its neighbors. today armenian food infuses he flavor from the mediterranean, middle east, and eastern europe. >> this is our 55th year and in san francisco we're the largest armenian food festival and widely recognized as one of the best food festivals in the area. we have vendors that come up from fresno, from los angeles showing off their craft. we really feel like we have

something for everyone in the neighborhood and that's really what it is, is drawing people to see a little bit of our culture and experience what we experience weekend in and weekend out. >> we are behind the scenes now watching the chef at work preparing some delicious armenian kabob. this is a staple in armenian cooking, is that right? >> absolutely, since the beginning of time. our soldiers used to skewer it on the swords. we have a combination of beef and lam and parsley. and every september over 2000 pounds of meat being cooked in three days. >> after all that savory protein, i was ready to check out the fresh veggie options. >> this is armenian cheat sheet. it's tomatos and mint and olive oil. that makes summer food. and what i'm doing is i'm putting some nutmeg.

it is kind of like cream cheese. in armenia when they offer you food, you have to eat it. they would welcome you and food is very important for them. >> in every armenian community we feel like we're a "smallville"age and they come together to put on something like this. what i find really interesting about san francisco is the blends of armenia that come together. once they are here, the way people work together at any age, including our grandmothers, our grandfathers, skewering the meat, it's fun to see. fun to see everybody get together. >> we call it subarek. it's a cheese turn over if you want. we make the dough from scratch. we boil it like you do for la san i can't. >> the amount of love and karin fused in these foods is tremendous. they come in every day to prepare, cook and bake bread, all in preparation for this big festival. >> nobody says no.

when you come them, they have to come tomorrow for the feast. >> what a treat it is to taste a delicious recipe, all made from scratch and passed down through generations. it really makes you appreciate the little things. >> it's one of the best festivals. it's outstanding, a marvelous occasion. >> we're outside checking some of the food to go options. i grabbed myself a ka bob sandwich, all kinds of herbs and spices. i'm going to taste this. looking fantastic. one of the best i've had in a long time. you know it's delicious b i have just enough room for dessert, my favorite part. we're behind the scenes right now watching how all the pastries get made. and we've got a whole array of pastries here. honey and nuts and cinnamon, all kinds of great ingredients. this is amazing. here's another yummy pastry

made with filo dough. oh, my god. really sweet and similar, it's lighter. this is what i like. we have a lovely row here. looks like a very delicious and exciting surprise. i'm going to bite into it. here we go. um. this is great with armenian coffee. now we're making some incredible armenian coffee. >> we buy our coffee, they have the best coffee. they come from armenia, specially made. and would you like to try it? >> i would like to try. >> would you like sugar or no sugar? >> no sugar today. i'm so excited.

really earthy. you can really taste the grain. i think that's what makes it so special. really comes out. i hope you try it. we're having a great time at the armenian festival. we ate, we saw, and we definitely conquered. i don't know about you, but i have to go down to the food. check out our blog for so much more at sf bites at tums abler.com. until next time, may the force be with you. ♪♪ ♪♪ >> first of all, everybody is welcome and we ask two things when they get here. one, that they try something they've never tried before. be it food or be it dancing or doing something. and if they feel like it was worth their while to tell one person and bring that person, that family member, that friend down the street to come with them.

>> we're going to have to do a lot of eating so get ready. >> get ready. >> shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their business in the 49 square files of san francisco. we help san francisco remain unique, successful and right vi. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> i'm one of three owners here in san francisco and we provide mostly live music entertainment and we have food, the type of food that we have a mexican food and it's not a big menu, but we did it with love. like ribeye tacos and quesadillas and fries. for latinos, it brings families

together and if we can bring that family to your business, you're gold. tonight we have russelling for e community. >> we have a ten-person limb elimination match. we have a full-size ring with barside food and drink. we ended up getting wrestling here with puoillo del mar. we're hope og get families to join us. we've done a drag queen bingo and we're trying to be a diverse kind of club, trying different things. this is a great part of town and there's a bunch of shops, a variety of stores and ethnic restaurants. there's a popular little shop that all of the kids like to

hang out at. we have a great breakfast spot call brick fast at tiffanies. some of the older businesses are refurbished and newer businesses are coming in and it's exciting. >> we even have our own brewery for fdr, ferment, drink repeat. it's in the san francisco garden district and four beautiful murals. >> it's important to shop local because it's kind of like a circle of life, if you will. we hire local people. local people spend their money at our businesses and those local people will spend their money as well. i hope people shop locally. [ ♪♪♪ ]

>> i went through a lot of struggles in my life, and i am blessed to be part of this. i am familiar with what people are going through to relate and empathy and compassion to their struggle so they can see i came out of the struggle, it gives them hope to come up and do something positive. ♪ ♪ i am a community ambassador.

we work a lot with homeless, visitors, a lot of people in the area. >> what i like doing is posting up at hotspots to let people see visibility. they ask you questions, ask you directions, they might have a question about what services are available. checking in, you guys. >> wellness check. we walk by to see any individual, you know may be sitting on the sidewalk, we make sure they are okay, alive. you never know. somebody might walk by and they are laying there for hours. you never know if they are alive. we let them know we are in the area and we are here to promote

safety, and if they have somebody that is, you know, hanging around that they don't want to call the police on, they don't have to call the police. they can call us. we can direct them to the services they might need. >> we do the three one one to keep the city neighborhoods clean. there are people dumping, waste on the ground and needles on the ground. it is unsafe for children and adults to commute through the streets. when we see them we take a picture dispatch to 311. they give us a tracking number and they come later on to pick it up. we take pride. when we come back later in the day and we see the loose trash or debris is picked up it makes you feel good about what you are doing. >> it makes you feel did about escorting kids and having them

feel safe walking to the play area and back. the stuff we do as ambassadors makes us feel proud to help keep the city clean, helping the residents. >> you can see the community ambassadors. i used to be on the streets. i didn't think i could become a community ambassador. it was too far out there for me to grab, you know. doing this job makes me feel good. because i came from where a lot of them are, homeless and on the street, i feel like i can give them hope because i was once there. i am not afraid to tell them i used to be here. i used to be like this, you know. i have compassion for people that are on the streets like the homeless and people that are

caught up with their addiction because now, i feel like i can give them hope. it reminds you every day of where i used to be and where i am at now. >> remote hearings require everyone's attention and patience. if you are not speaking please new your microphone to enable public participation, sfgov tv is broadcasting and streaming this hearing life and we will receive public comments for eachitem on today's agenda . comments or opportunities to speak are available by calling 415-615-0001.

and entering access code 2487 389 3596. when we reached the item you are interested in speaking to please press star 3 to be added to the queue.when you are light is on that is your indication to begin speaking. each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes and when you have 30 seconds left you will hear a child. when your allotted time is reached i will announce your time is up and take the next person to speak. best practices article from a quiet location, clearly and slowly and mute the volume on your television or computer. unlike to take role at this time. [rollcall] we do expect

commissioner chan to be absent today but i have been in conversation with her and she should be returning shortly probably in november. first on your agenda is consideration of items posed for continuance, item number 1007481 cua 5367 diamond heights boulevard pay conditional use authorization proposed for continuance to november 4, 2021. item 2 case 2016-00182 1515th street a large project authorization is proposed for an indefinite continuance. further commissioners underyour regular calendar , item 13 for case number 2017-00178 cua 425 broadway a conditional use authorization proposed for continuance to november 4, 202

. and finally under your discretionary review calendar i am pleased to announce item 28 four case 2021-00822 drp at 46 duncan street for discretionary review has been withdrawn. but we will ask the zoning administrator to continue item 20 b. the variance portion of the project at 486 duncan street to the next variance hearing on october 27. i have no other items proposed for continuance and we should take publiccomment . this is your opportunity to address the commission on any of the items proposed for continuance by pressing star 3. seeing no one from the public public comment is closed and the items proposed for continuance are now before you

commissioners. commissioner imperial. >> we need to approve all items as noted. >> second. >> on that motion to continue items as proposed commissioner tanner. [roll call vote] you are muted, commissionerimperial . [roll call vote] so moved commissioners, that motion passes unanimously . >> 17th street was getting continued as well. >> i did not receive any requests to continue 17thstreet . >> is jeff here?

>> jeff barnes, planning staff. if i heard word from our sponsor of willingness for the project to be continued and disposition of upcoming legislation to beheard by the commission on corner lots . >> i think they were asking for a full continuance to get this the on the time of legislation. >>. >> president: i did not receive aformal request from the project sponsor . if you all are supportive for requesting continuance we can do it now or call it when the item is called. >> i will request to continue it. >> president: you'd like to do it now? okay. let's get through what we've just accomplished because we have a unanimous vote of 6202 continue all items as proposed. zoning administrator on item 20 b.

>> i will continue the variance for item 20 b to the next variance hearing on october 27 . >> thank you for that. at this time we will take up the matter of items 17a and b . for case numbers 2019-013808c or a and b are at 4317th stree . a conditionaluse authorization and the variance . so director health, nursing the project sponsor is requesting a four-week continuance beyond the mandolin sponsored. >> one week from today. >> so 4 weeksfrom today . on november 11 which is a canceled hearing. we can place it on november 18 november 18 is fairly full. and then the 25th is canceled.

december 2 hearing is very light but i'll leave it to the commissioners if they are willing to continue thismatter to november18 . i know it does come with significant opposition . >> i will start off by saying i'm in support of the continuance andwould prefer that earlier date not going into december . >> .den. commissioners, we will propose this matter becontinued to november 18 . is there emotion? a motion to continue. >> commissioner tanner. >> i would move tocontinue the item to november 18 . >> thank youcommissioners and on that motion to continue item 1782november . >> you may want to take public comment . >> thank you. members of the public this is your opportunity to address th committee . >> i didn't hear discussion

aboutnovember 4 was a possibility . >> they requested 4 weeks. i think there's upcoming informational items with legislation. and then this would ideally be continued to after we hear the. >> corner lot is the exception is scheduledcurrently scheduled to concur on october 28 . >> okay. >> but i think november 18 would give us time to continue as a matter of further discussion . . >> so members of the public, this is now your opportunity to speak to this matter of continuanceonly. for item 17 a and b . to november 18th. you will have two minutes.

>> caller: i'm a member of the public and i'm here on fourth street . there's significant opposition to this project and a lot of folks are coming in today. this is the first i've heard of any proposedcontinuance whatsoever . i think it's important members of the public particularly neighbors havetheir voice heard during this part of it . this is the surprise continuance andthere's a lot of people who want to speak today. i fully understand or grasp the nature of the continuance . who proposed it, why it's a faircontinuance but i know there's a lot of people who want to speak today and are planning to do so i think today is the day to review this matter . >> hello, i imagine these people, this is george. i did write a letter about it buti will talk about that now i do want to say is if this is continued , if this is a

surprisecontinuance this would be the fourth hearing as i counted right . unless i'm wrong about that. so i just think that should be a concern for everyone. thanks, goodbye. >> members of thepublic last choral call for public comment on item 17 a and b continuance . seeing no additional requestto speak for members of the public , public comment is closed and the matter is now before you commissioners. >> commissioner imperial. >> ihave a question about the timing . the timeline of the proposed lot. it's coming up as far as i know in your event in on november 4 four and then it's being proposed for continuance in 2 weeks. so for november 18 earlier than that.

i'd like to understand the timing and why do we need to have to go through the proposed lot legislation first rather than hearingit then . >> just for the benefit of membersof the public , this last-minute request surprised me as well. legislation for dwelling in the density exceptions for corner lots in orange d districts is comingbefore you commissioners on october 28 . and i believe it is the sponsor's request to have his matter considered after that legislation comes before you and so we're getting a bit of a cushion and continuing this matter to november18 . >> thank you chair jonas. i think it's important to continuance and i believe this should be heard today so i think the public were not properly noticedfor this

continuance . >> commissioner diamond. >> i would be supportive of that continuance because the request itself places significant policy issues about what it is we can allow on corner lots. not just density but formation and it feels like having the hearing now before we understand legislation on this subject will address is the wrong order.and while i understand the neighbors frustration in showing up and just hearing about it it does seem to me it makes more sense to understand what supervisor mendelson is proposing and what amendments we might suggest prior tothe time we undertake a private act . i would move toapprove .

>> president: well said commissionerdiamond . i'llcall on commissioner tanner . >> i will be supporting the continuance today and i want to thank all the folks who written in and areon the line now for this item is support or oppose the project . at least short tenure on the commission we are i think in a good way generous with continuances when they requested. some project sponsors so i think this is in keeping with that tradition and i hope you will be able to write if they haven't already or to attend the hearing on the 18th and i certainly can't can appreciate last-minute changes not being fun for anyone. and hope that we will hear from you all on the 18th . >> president: commissioner more. >> i would approve the continuance for the two reasons but under us is the subdivision which is lots where the corner lot is a substandard parcel which has a built in wall beyond it so in the knowledge

about the supervisor mandolins legislation has been on for a while and why was this property not announced with respect to all of us? each commissioner spends a significant amount of time on preparing pacific projects because it has significant pushback but to provide an extra amount of time to fully do justice to what's in front of us and that is for reading and understanding all pros and cons and i personally share the frustration of the public who are basically toldafter all the work has been done at this is not being rejected today so i will not support the continuance . >> thank you commissioners and if there's nothingfurther there's a motion to have them seconded to continue this matter to november 18 and on that motion commissioner tanner . >> commissioner diamond.

commissioner fong. >>. >> commission president koppel. the motion passes 40 2. missionersimperial and more voting against . >> i will continue the associated variance item 17 b to the november 18 hearing. >> thank you for that. commissioners, that will place us on your consent calendar. and the matter listed here under constitutes your consent calendar. you've considered to be routine and may be acted uponby a single rollcall vote . there will be no separate discussion unless the numbers in commission or staff request so this matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this board and future hearings item 3 case number 2021 006208 and 2104 a street

traditional use authorization. members this is an opportunity to remove this matter all the consent calendar and have it considered at the end of today's agenda. you need to pressáthree to be added to the queue. seeing no members requesting members of the public to speak atthis time . public comment is closed and your consent calendar commissioners. >> commissioner tanner. >> i moved to approve the consentcalendar . >> thank you commissioners, on that motion toapprove item 3 on your consent calendar missioners tanner . [roll call vote] so moved

commissioners. we will place this on their commission matters for item for consideration of adoption of trial limits forseptember 30, 2021.members of the public this is your opportunity to speak by pressingáthree . when you hear your line has been unneeded at your indication to continue speaking and to the charitable have two minutes . >>anyone? >> i guess they did not want to the minutes . members of the public, last call to the minutes of september 30, 2021, you need to press star 3. seeing no requests to speak public comment is closedand the minutes are before you . commissioner more. >> moved to approve. >> second. >> president: on that motion to

adopt the minutes commissioner tanner. [roll call vote] so moved commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 620 placing us on item 5, commission comments and questions . okay. seeing no requests to speak from members of the commission we can move right along to item or excuse me, under department matters. >> no announcements today. >> president: review of past events at the board of supervisors and the board of appeals. there wasnone at the commission hearing yesterday . >> eric sartre management of legislative affairs and this board put on observance of indigenous peoples day.

however the mayor did hold across pressconference on tuesday . director ho and i attended the press conference which we rode our bikes to. director hillis had a slight advantage as hewrote an electric bike while i have my normal but . we were able to reach our destination by using the 44th avenue slope street. the mayor intends to introduce the ordinance next tuesday the purpose of cars to cause is to encourage housing and development on personal that are currently being used for auto with the goal of using the city's housing shortage while addressing the impacts of automobiles on climate change, pedestrian safety and the ability. the first would be to remove the ce requirement to convert an automobile service station to existing use and the second would be to decontrol or

density on lots with uses. another introduces the signs of automotive use for the planning code as well as accessory parking lot or garage. properties with existing housing would not be as eligible for the program. as always this itemwill be coming to you for your review and recommendation and i'm available for questions . >>thank you. if there are no questions , to mister starr the voting administrator will move. >> the court of appeals did not meet this week. >> then we can move on to general public comment at this time. members of the public may address the commission on matters within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission accept agenda items. with respect to agenda items youropportunity to address will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting . each member of the public may address the commission forup to

three minutes and when the number of speakers exceeds the limit general public comment may be reviewed at the end of the agenda .members of the public this is your opportunity to address thecommission under general public comment by pressingáthree . when you hear the airline has been unneeded at your indication to beginspeaking . you each have two minutes. >> it's george . i sent a little picture that i think mister iona and staff will be kind enough to show. it's a follow-up to my email from tuesday with photos of another project which is also a continuation of my response to the october 7 commissioners comments and questions last week and i wrote that email response to october 7. regarding the demo caps and i hope you have a chance to read that email response to your comments and questions on october 7 and the attachments with that email which include a link to a 2012 sf weekly

article which is accurate as i said in my email as it's pretty astounding and of course mister nikita's handwritten statement which is what he sent to the commission march 26, 2009. the photos that i sent an email on tuesday of the nutleyvalley project. there i see it now.i took that one yesterday . it's on the screen now but the photos isent earlier in the tuesday emails were sent out a month ago . were taken a month ago . and the interior of the house as it was before the work and also a screenshot of our commentary from the nlp the art for the project. so ihope you'll read all that . i think this shows why the demo packs need to be adjusted and several other projects similar to this in various ages in the valley right now. even though he did saythe staff did say it was the epicenter of

de facto demolition . and i'm worried about not addressing the demo caps because i feel like we're going to be like we were in the post-2008 collapse once we get into the post covid situation so i think the cap should be adjusted sooner than later and one more pointnot to be too mean about it but one year ago october 8 , during directors comments item number six director ho did say they're working on the demo caps. so you can see that october 8, 2020 item number six. anyway talk to you later. i'm hanging up now, goodbye. >> commissioners david osgood. i'll talk about the stephanie ordinance later but i wanted to conclude my comments about awnings and sightings in general. i'll wrap up by encouraging you to please regulate these

god-awful awnings that are becoming so common . slide to please. city leaders talk about maintaining san francisco's unique character and distinctive appearance. especially in the cultural districts.and increasing property values etc. but this iswhat you are now allowing . all across the city, slide three please. awnings like these don't accomplish any of those goals. the same things about projecting signs, slide four please. i don't know when san francisco got so far off the rails but i just don't see other cities allowing ejecting signs to come back so thoroughly this.i don't have any kind of study

2.2 but i've discoveredone way to gauge what other citiesare doing . which you might want to do . slide five please this is a shot of san jose taken fromthe news. when you watch the evening news , very often ourstories show other cities downtown . you can tell right away when they regulate signs. and i've noticed the cities from san jose which is on the screen to new orleans to even wheeling westward west virginia of all places don't have a lot of projecting signs. they don't seem to have the awful awnings either. so please, let's get the san francisco train back on the track. you need to start regulating these awful awnings. thank you very much.

>> good afternoon commissioners, ozzie brown. i was just listening to the request for continuance of 4317th street and i was baffled by someof the comments i heard from the commissioners . for one you decided to continue this case to november 18. and i think i heard commissioner diamond saying in light of the new state legislation 59, maybe that's a good reason to continue this. commissionerdiamond , i highly doubt if by november 18 the city of san francisco is going to ratify sb nine and actually update its planning code to allow that and secondly are a lot standard of today is 2500 square feet and i believe sb nine will not be able to allow us to build or build a lot when

it's going to beless than our standard lot size .so i do recall that about a year ago the planning was proposing reducing the lot size 1250 square feet. that's a surprise, maybe they had a premonition about sb nine passing but as of now we don't have our lot size having been reduced. the standard lot size having been reduced to anythingless than 2500 . the reason for continuing this for another month or so is basically not valid. but i understand. things have come to this commission. if the project sponsor wants to continue it for whatever reason for the most part the commission does grant the continuance but the reason for the continuance waiting for sb 92 be ratified, i don't think it holds so i wanted to bring

that to your attention and let you know what the issues are with sb nine and that's it . >>. >> caller: linda chapman. thanks for the eir. after next week i will beable to on wednesday start getting on with that and thank you . in that case and inthese others that have come up recently i'm veryconcerned . it's like you're in a difficult position . if the staff keepsshoving things that you whether they're practical, whether they meet thebuilding code or the planning code and so on or not , then you see here and you have a limited amount of time . you havedevelopers making all kinds of promises that are ludicrous in many cases and th cities going to wind up in

litigation which could be avoided if the planners were sticking to the planning code . i sent you the video i think . maybe i didn't. updated saying we the fact that we have all these state laws doesn't mean that the california building code doesn't apply obviously and the planning code on top . so you'veapproved a project on pine street that is going to lead to inhabitable units .if they get permits from the building departmentand no one with the building department as they may do what happens when they call the housing inspector to look at these places where there is no usable window really ? no era and so forth. wheni lived in the co-op my kitchen windows were on the property line . when a project is being done the contractorsinsisted they weregoing to use an openable window . i complained and the housing inspector said if they do that we will force them to tear it

out . i don't suppose they're going to force you to tear out the building. they won't allow the building units to be inhabited. i'm talking about the bmr units and the rental building, they willbe condemned and the ho a next door are condemned . what they have to do is to sue for the ruin of their building. they consume for construction defects 10 years after it's done by the developer. thedeveloper didn't have a unit exposure and so forth. you approved it . >> iq. members of the public last call for general public comment for items not on the agenda, press star 3. when youhear your line hasbeen a muted , you may begin speaking . >> caller: hello. i would love to speak in regards to this signage and

projected awnings. >> president: wehave not reached that item yet . when we do you make press star 3 to get into the queue. final last call for general public comment, please press star 3. when you your line has been unmuted you may speak. [inaudible] >> caller: good afternoon commissioners. my name is diane wesley smith . according to experts this is in regard to ... hello? >> go ahead. >> caller: i'm calling in regard to the housing ho a dues.

i'm calling in regards to complexes that are built. small communities that are comprised of condominiums and our effort to secure home ownership for the least of us or for single people,young people, families. the impeachment is ho way . so i'm asking respectfully that some in-depth research be done and i'm happy to provide it about the effects of an adequate ho a dues. for example the average family in san francisco ismaking less than $75,000 . and let me break it down. in condominiums, there's cc and are. conditions covenants and restrictions. that governs the affordable community and there can be assessments given anytime. theamount of ho a dues can be

raised at any time . of course these things are fleshed out in the cc&r so unless we really look at when planning is granted, when a plan is granted before that happens i respectfully ask that you take a good hard look at what are they proposing because it's one thing to place people in the home, in a condominium area right now that is the best option for so many people but in terms of retention they can't remain if the ho a dues go up so say the mortgage note is 38,000 but the ho a dues ar 800 . they can even go as high as or they can go as high as whatever the cc&r says. thank you very much. >> president: thank you. final last call for general public comment. press star 3. seeing no response from the

public general comment is closed. i'd like to clarify it miss long's comments. commissioner diamonds statement and the request from the project sponsor was to continue 4317th street to a date after the planning commission considers the mandelman legislation for density exceptions for corner lots and rhd's and then further to clarify the city would not be ratifying the state bill but rather it will be going into effect come january 1. just fo clarification purposes. commissioners, that will be placed on your regular calendar . item 2021 0327 tpa for business on awning at marquise.

this is the planning code amendment and you did hear this last week on october 7 and after hearingand closing public comment you continue to today's date by a vote of ecstasy with direction to the department staff asa result . we will hear from staff but any public comment will be reduced to one minute . missmaloney are you prepared to make your presentation ?>> before i do so i believe supervisor stefani is here to speak on herordinance. whenever you are ready . >> thank you so much andit's a pleasure to be here today . i wanted to thank you for continuing this and hearing this item again. as you know the legislation before you offers an amendment to the planning code to allow businesses to put their business name on both their projecting signs and their awnings i'm going to tell you what this legislation does not do . it does not change existing

site restrictions on signs citywide. it does not change existing illumination restrictions on signs citywide and it does not allow billboards where they previously were not allowed. as my aid shared last week over 400 businesses across the city already have their business name on both their projecting signs and their awnings. and an enforcement case against a beloved business in my district is what prompted me t start thinking about this problem . i was absolutely baffled that during the pandemic. when our businesses were suffering, struggling to stay alive that i had a business in my district that was receiving emails from the planning department city enforcement division, racking up penalties because he had his business name on a projected sign and an awning. i could not believe what we as the city were putting him

through. it was absolutely unheard of. and during my nine years as a legislative aide in the city now nearly 4 years as a supervisor i've heard all sorts of complaints. and i have to tell you, businesses having their name on both their awnings and projecting signs is not what floods my inbox. i have the most respect for this commission. and i deeply appreciate the thoughtfulness with which caused issues like this one are discussedand analyzed however i want to be very clear . that the matter before you present us with a policy choice with respectto how we treat small businesses in our city . the pandemic has had a devastating impact on small businesses . we all know they're struggling to survive in san francisco

long before march 2020. and it's because of ordinances like the one that would put the business and my district under severe threats to cause he had his name on it awning and a projected sign. and he was facing tens of thousands of dollars in fines because of that. which i think is absolutely ridiculous. and after the past year and a half, the city has an obligation to the small business community to be responsive to their needs and offer a long-term solution to issues they are facing. whether it's waving their business and registration fees for a year while we force them to close which i was able to do at the board of supervisors , making our proclamation permanent or simply allowing them to have their business names on an awning and

projected sign.i feel confident this proposal which would legalize signage for over 400 businesses and provide flexibility for future busines is a common sense dilution . that will not jeopardize the special look and feel of our neighborhood and will not visually pollute our commercia corridors and will not degrade our public spaces . i respectfully askthat you approve this legislation . thank you. >> thank you very much supervisor and i believe i have a presentation if icould get that presentation on the screen . >> president: are you sharing the screen? you are the presenter. >> let me try here.

all right. let's see if i can get this to work. apologies all. are you able to see the presentation? >> president: yes we can see i . >> it's my firsttime sharing a presentation . as supervisor stefani and others have stated this item

was originally heard october 7 and commissioners, you asked us to continue requesting more informationfrom us . with that i will present all that information. at first four i start that presentation want to give a huge thank you to our design team and in particulargary chen . gary managed to complete two renderings in theshort timeline working very long hours to do so so thank you to gary . before i go over the renderings garymade i want to walk you through a bit of our process . first i want to ask our different mps to gather images for the rendering and i found it challenging to find a clear shot of businesses that were visible in a way that would allow you to see the awning signs and business signs.it prompted me to turn to google to find a generic american main

street that we can potentially use for the renderings instead and the first result from that search is a 2018 article from architectural digest ranking the 30 most beautiful main streets across america. i hope this is an image from the article. these are the images the article uses at these these are six random towns in america that the article has decided are aesthetically appealing. i wanted to include this because what i found interesting was the amount of not only signage but other objects of interest that existed in all of these main streets.i want to highlight this to remind us what we're talking about when we are speaking of what is visually appealing and what that really means even in our most traditional sense. to again kind of reiterate the fact that when i was walking around and driving this week i noticed it is not common to

walk down the street and only see signage. here is an example of three different streets that i visited. these are all blocks of mpd'si had previously picked because i know they contain many awning and projecting signs . what's interesting is it's actually viewable. you have parked cars, street trees, muni lines and parklands and all those things contribute to the character of the street and make it veryrare you walk down the street in san francisco and theonly thing you'llsee is the sign on the storefront . on to the main event , the rendering . so like i stated it was really difficult to find a street and angle which that street could be rendered to shed a maximum awning signage andprojecting signage in the same picture . we ended up using the street in a sea district, the commercial district that happens to have few signs and awnings.

what you see inthis image is if every business take advantage of our maximum awning signs and projecting sign . this is allowed in our post day and we chose to use an mpp three district that allowed the largest sign of any of the districts object to the ordinance. with that projecting signs may stick out six feet six inches from the wall. there normally within 75 percent of the sidewalk list. the sign of the projecting sign can be 32 square feet large maximum and it may not be higher than the windowsill of the lowest residential source for this example we presumed all residential starts on the second floor. the residences also have their maximum awning in this rendering which means awning extends the length of the storefront and projects for feet over the sidewalk. this is what is allowable today in the worst-case scenario if every business took advantage oftheir maximum on their

maximum projecting sign . and this is the next image. this rendering illustrates the worst-case scenario. if all of the samebuildings have their maximum awnings , their maximum projection sign and added the maximum amount of signed copy allowed on that awning. so again, you'd see mcp street district controls which allow up to 40 square feet ofsigned copy across all lines . other districts have explored limiting the sign copy to 20 or 30square feet . so as most of the signs and awnings in this rendering are hypothetical i thought it may be additional useful to see some real world examples so i did a fewrenderings of my own . businesses that have both an awning sign and a business signed today. so to ensure your not calling

out specific businesses i erased all the identifying information and replaced the signage with generic signage that more or less matches the style of the sign they have. the top left image shows a generic restaurant that has an awning with the sign and they actually do have a projecting sign which is quite common that is the red sign at thecorner that actually sits underneath their awning . the middle image is another version of the business that has both the sign on their awning and projecting sign. and the third i wanted to make sure i included because it's in certain districts you'll actually not allowed to have a wall sign and an awning sign . and this ordinance proposes to allow wall signs do exist so that a third example there. there's a sign advertising both on the wall and the awning also advertises both.

as i was going through this design exercise andtalking with our design staff i think it was interesting to kind of realized that projecting signs and awning signs are two very different options .projecting signs are generally viewed by pedestrians walking down the same side of the street and those in bikes and buses and trains going down the road rise awning signs are viewed by pedestrians across the street. although sometimes a sign of an awning can serve the same function as a projecting sign it can really only be utilized if there are no other awnings or obstructions on the basic building . i want to take this time to say that it came to our attention this week there is a letter among community groups making several claims that are fairly misleading and as a result ignited abit of fear and consternation among the public . due to some of the claims made in that letter i want to take a moment toclarify with the legislation will do and not do . so legislation. it would allow businesses to

have a projecting sign or long sign in certain districts in order to put sign copy on their awnings. there's a fear this legislation will create thousands of new signs and in one sense you could say the legislation will create many new signs the cause many of our existing awning signs would be able to file a permit to legalize it if they could not have previously because they present a projecting sign and it would also mean businesses that currently only have an awning sign could file a permit to install a projecting sign and a business that has an awning and a projecting sign could now also file to add sign copy to their existing awnings. so the ordinance would result in the legalization of some existing signage and allow for a new combination of signage not previously allowed to exist collectively but it's misleading to state this ordinance willresult in more

intrusive or constructive signage for open the floodgates for signs to clog our streetscape . the ordinance does not change any control for signs under sign placement, materials or design as the supervisor just stated. a projecting sign that is illegal today that is noncompliant with any of these factors would remain illegal if this legislation is passed. the same is true for the dimensional requirements of awnings and the same is true on the signed copy. lastly it would not affect the additional review or restrictions based on signs for historic buildings.so to conclude the presentation i just wanted to be very clear about where this ordinance would apply and not apply if passed . this is the map also located on page 12 of the report. the ordinance if passed as currently drafted would apply in the areas of the map in color with the exception that

any of the crosshatched areas of special sign controls would not be altered. the department has recommended expanding the ordinance to all the remaining zoning districts that don't allow both an awning and projecting sign or a awning and a wall sign whether that's only a recommendation and not part of the ordinance as currently drafted. with that i want to thank you for yourtime and your patience in making this follow-up presentation and that includes staff'spresentation and i am happy to answer your questions. >> thank you audrey. before we go into commissioner deliberations , i would result in immediate questions . we should take public comment andas previously stated commissioners, members of the public you will each receive one minute as this item has already been heard and when you your line has been a muted that yourindication to begin speaking . >> i certainly object tothe one minute. i disagree with the supervisor . you should not undo decades ,

40 or 50 years of sound legislation and regulation every time there's an economic downturn. that's absolutelyoutrageous planning . the images you've been presented are the 30 most beautifulmain streets . that is not what court cortland looks like. i showed you an image earlier of an awning on cortland. you need to consider the real world and not some chichi town in colorado. i know what else to say. i'm getting bumped off already. the damage issues you're seeing, i was an architectural draftsman. the writing on theawnings is not 40 square feet . in all these images. i don't think it's even 20 where feet. it's very misleading. thank you.

>> linda chapman, i couldn't agree more with the supervisor and ask to advertising i'm very disturbed bythe false advertising thatkeeps being circulated by the advocate for extreme sign control affecting my neighborhood , it's the historic neighborhoods i'm concerned about . i live in the neighborhood commercial districts of montiel right now. i went out after that last hearing and look at the signage. more than half of them would violate the signage is being advocated by the extreme controls advocate for one thing. they look great as a matter of fact. even the places idon't care for like the karaoke place ,it is not a problem that it has a sign out and a marquee .the neon sign by the hotel above, down below is the dark marquee for the run shot down below. no problem. my two favorite restaurants

have all wall sign and an awning, well sculpted and the projecting sign. there. . like the designer told you last time. that would be the designer that the extreme advocatesays obviouslydoesn't know what he's doing any more than i do . and then there's powell street . >> thank you, that is your time. >> caller: this is jim lyman president of the entertainment commission. there was a time when all the businesses werea dime a dozen . there was a time when we could afford to micromanage angstlike what they canput on signs . that time is long behind us . it was way before covid. online retailers and alsoto factors have pushed us to the break . this is exactly the kind of measure we need to amend and fix our small businesses can

survive post-áuntran4á and move forward . >> this is tim hayman, i'm the owner of the business that was referenced and thank you for bringing this up. it's a huge appreciation to see that . or so lucky to see all old codes like this get updated. this is an unprecedented time. watched a restaurant on our block even during the pandemic take two years and during the pandemic theyfinally got open. as a city we have to do better . these have this updated to the old codes and make it easier for smallbusinesses tosurvive . these are difficult times. i appreciate the presentation . >> caller: thank you, my name is miriam. i'm calling in my personal capacity but however i also sit on the small business commission and i'm calling in support of supervisor stefani's

legislation. this is exactly the type of code cleanup that our supervisors of small-business constituents and our small businesscommission have been trying to address . ever since before covid when we realized we had aslew of broken window air policies . still other books do in fact affect businesses that serve low income communities and family-owned businesses , single-story brick-and-mortar's that small property owners own. and this is exactly the type of low hanging fruit that will be a win for our politicians and our smallbusinesses . this has nothing to do with urban blight and in fact the fact that we still have anti- bloating laws and codes like this show that we have not amended hour, we haven't

improved our equity in terms of code cleanup. thank you. >> thank you. >> i'm calling from the local commission on behalf of the supervisors presentation. i couldn't agree more. i do not see signage as any type of disturbance and i believe it's essential for businesses especially small businesses to increase awareness around what their offerings are and i think it's the fabric of ourcommunity . it's a huge part of that. and i would hate to punish our businesses during a time when they need support the most. thank you. >> this is manny btl, a member of the sf mta calling today in my capacity as a private citizen and most importantly as a small business owner.

i want to thank supervisor stefani for speaking to this issue. san francisco is one of the most difficult cities in america to do business. with the cost of labor and the regulation thisjust allows businesses to have the business name on both their projecting sign and there awning . if the commissioners are thinking about a way that you can all do one thing to help small business owners make it in the city this is one step you can do to make it easier. we do need to reduce opportunities and honestly just try to level the playing field between brick and mortar businesses and online spots for sale. a lot of other major cities don't limit businesses on both sides and san francisco should be the easiest, simplest and least expected place to do business given the folks trying to get into this work.thank you for thisstep and please do pass this piece of legislation .

>> caller: i'm speaking on as a member of the public on this issue and i wanted to say that i fully agree with the supervisors proposal. i mention the fact other major cities including chicago and dc don't limit businesses having their name on both signs and in new york city we don't even need a permit.i want to raise the topic of equity on this policy question because of the 400 businesses across san francisco most of them are black and brown communities and business owners who don't necessarily have the same resources available to them to come into compliance withthis role . moreover regulations are important to like govern our city but some of them are just foolish and stupid and hurt

lack and brown community members unnecessarily and this is one of them. please let's move forward and agree with the supervisor. thank you for your time .>> caller: hello commissioners, this is sharkey light gonna, president of the small business commission but today i'm speaking on my own behalf. this morning i have the sad task of talking to yet another business owner who is makingthe decision to close . san francisco is seeing more businesses closed and open to having to compete with tech , having to compete with the businesses that have large tech businesses and can afford to open just one location without a lot of advertising. our city has vacancies everywhere. and we really need to support this legislation and make san francisco a place accommodating and welcoming to new opportunities, to entrepreneurs

particularly those from disadvantaged communities really need that help. i personally love to see signs that i love to see who's filling in a business and what service or what bagel i can buy or what where i can get a haircut. i think that this makes our city more robust and more vibrant. not just now in the state of emergency but over the long run and i hope that we can all get behind this and support small businesses . >> good afternoon commissioners corey smith with the housing action coalition . just listening to the conversation today, i want to make two comments. number one, given the current world in a state of small businesses in san francisco, it makes a lot of sense to prioritize care means over the desires of people who do not