contributed by theresidents themselves so they just set their share values at $10,000 each . it's all regulated by california code. it doesn't have to be $10,000 but the residentsdecided $10,000 represented something meaningful in order to appreciate that and create equity .so they managed to raise that $200,000 and in addition to that this is an interesting property because it's also mixed commercial use property. the asian law caucus also bought estate on that ground-floor part of the building it reallyrepresents this interesting blend of public , private and community funding . i think it's also a really great example of how a co-op can achieve financial sustainability. within the first year that puc was created it was converted into an lehc and achieve

financial stability so everything was being paid out by steering costs and in addition it was paying for the role of a outreach coordinator, someone built into the project budget that would support that. so thetraining that normal was talking about was not outsourced . it was actually put into the project budget and someone at the board identified as having the right skill set and the right bilingual background as well because the person who ended up being hired was fully bilingual and mandarin and english as well as cantonese which was really important aspect of i think what was mentioned earlier about the importance of building trust. with the residents because it's not necessarily the case that the board or group of residents trust outsiders and particularly not non- bipod outsiders. so all this is done within a

couple of years and to this day it's extremelyfinancially sustainable . one data point which speaks to that is this is the only property in our portfolio that has doesn't have one set in arrears in its entire period of what has been an extremely difficult time. so i think we can really reverse. i think by looking at the case of the narrative around co-ops being you know, kind of huge drains on public resources, that they don't, they're not financially sustainable, it's just not true . itdepends on the kind of co-op that you're advancing . i want to see a little bit now to the difference between asset management and stewardship since supervisor melgar asked me to speak a little bit to that. need around capacity and what does that look like? in asset management what we're

talking about is permanent affordable rentals. there's a number of things understood to besort of within the jurisdiction of the asset manager isusually someone paid between 80 andthe hundred thousand year if you think about the whole benefits and costs of that would be 120,000 a year and we're talking something between 80 and 100 units . so somebody is being paid to do all of these things . assessing and maintaining finances in thecapital lease , ensuring physical maintenance both in the short-term and long-term. coordinating property management . which also has a cost as i mentioned earlier the cost of the asset manager but we're also talking about something like $780 per unit . that'son property management. and then there's compliance with city and stateregulation

including housing and finally in san francisco we have the additional complexity of the filling of vacancies or the system or overseeing that members . was different was stewardship . we like to call it stewardship becauseit's inclusive of this part of asset management but it's also about providing this to residents through education. so the resident and education coordinator i mentioned earlier is our operations manager jimmy . he stayed on with the organization these last eight years. she provided thistype of a five-part education series so comprehensive of everything that was mentioned in herasset management. in all of this is done over time . it is not necessarily the case that it will make sense to convert an lec right away . in the case of dac we get this education afterwards. it could be the case however and as will be the case withour next lph see a 40 unit building in the tenderloin that we are currently in the process of acquiring , we will actually go through this education series before we convert to lph see

and i will get into the details of what that decision involves. since i don't think we have time. some advantages of pacs over permanently affordable rentals . we have the opportunity to build equity for individuals while creating permanently affordable asset for the community. you have the opportunity to own a home by pooling resources like supervisor melgar mentioned. you may have that bad credit, why should that follow you around for the rest of your life and make you unable to buy a home. you have entitlements into homeownership.the inheritable right that i mentioned and opportunities for governance and democratic participation there's a lot of studies that show that people who actually participate in the self-governance of their buildings actually event extend that toengaging in civic issues and civic affairs . i spoke a little bit about our latest projects at church, this is for units of what were going

to advance as bipod homeownership. this really came of a new vision at sf plc that emerged over the last six months which is about how we need to center racial equity at the heart of not just the way we govern our board which is by the way majority bipoc but at theheart of our acquisition strategy . so this 40 unit building. >> .a five-minute part. >> so. >> she gets that 10 minutes for thispresentation, sorry about that . >> thank you. this 40 units is a majority filipino black and latin text community. the majority being mayan indigenouspeople from the yucatan peninsula .we determined a five year timeline

and building into the project budget thecoordinator that we mentioned , we will be able to temper this to a limited including housing. it is critical as i mentioned the support from the resident education coordinator and why we haven't really emphasized the need for this in the budget and to our lenders. and to our funders, we also get a huge million dollar, over a million-dollar equity run of donations from a number of individuals and large foundations so an interesting creative mix of financing that weput into this building . not one set of public dollars because we decided we wanted to avoid some of the complications with regard to the inefficiencies filling vacancies in this building through the dahlia system and we will ensure it complies with their housing laws. again i want to speak a little

bit. go back to the challenges i think you could probably hear it from what i was saying with regard to 285 and the need to stay out of city funding unfortunately. these are some of the challenges we face with organizations toscale the model . we had a successful case of an a lehc in 2009 and in 2021 we are advancing lehc's again and creating a new lehc. what kind of challenge is always facing? first is the high cost of accounting butthat's a given. we're not going to get around that . we have to figure out innovative policy to deal with that kind of problem. and co-ops and this policy might be i think one of the more promising ones and of course with the social housing program that's beingadvanced by supervisor preston . it's also about the bad rap that co-ops get and i've spoken

a little bit to that.that's because of the merging of all the different types ofco-ops that lydia mentioned . we have hud sponsored co-ops with a different history there and also a history of divestment and the deterioration of those buildings. that's not the same for example fromwhat i talked about which is low equity housing cooperative that's not the same. the group housing cooperatives that we have in san francisco we have actually a couple of those as well . there are large challenges with the group housing congregate co-ops so i don't thinkit's a perfect model . really what we're trying to advance is lehc's have a high rate of success across the

country . there are a lot of really fabulous examples of lehc. there are studies done about pairing lehc's and the success rate ishigh. there was an inverse relationship of lehc's in foreclosures during the 2007 2008 crisis . so actually less people were goinginto foreclosure in that period than in other period's . we had a good report from washington dc of 99 limited equity housing cooperatives. really interesting things coming out of there particularly since that community was a very high bipoc majority community that has been displaced massively over time, over decades in washington dc but lehc being an important way in which that is beingreversed . i think that we need to change the narrative around talking about this.it's an important moment where engaging in to do so and this will address some of theother things i'm going to

mention about the barriers at stake . access to the small programs and other state funding, yes. i think because of what i mentioned is harder to get these kinds of projects approved by a small business. there's not a guarantee that a project funded by small sites will be able to convert to a lehc. i think we need to kind of make sure that there are clauses in every single one of our loan agreements that mention this particular aspect and guaranteeing the city will take it into serious consideration whether or not the project should be able to convert to lehc because there's nothing in our san francisco ordinances and laws that say that it can and infinite in fact state to the contrary that lehc's or compline contemplated by the small business program and furthermore there's a lack of dollars for maintaining co-ops.

i'll just mention we put in an application earlier this year for this process which was not funded . i know there are other people externally being funded like enterprise but i also know that market is going very slowly so there's a lack of understanding about how much it costs to actually make this model work and also a kind of lack of fairness about the fact that you do need to put a significant amount of initial capacity dollars in to make this work. you can't just say i guess it didn't work because co-ops suck. it's not that co-ops suck, you have to putthat initial investment in and if you don't you can't blame the people who didn't have the resources to make something work . so there's that issue. there'salso the issue of the inefficiencies of filling

vacancies through dahlia. i'm not saying dahlia one way or the other is a bad thing or good thing . i think the overall we care about fair housing.we care the preference of ordinances is advanced and guaranteed but the dahlia is a tool, not an end and it has to get us there to ensuring those two things and that there may actually be alternative ways to meet those requirements and we may just really have to work into how do we make dahlia more efficient cause we can't ask hauser's have months and months of units that are left vacant because that completelyundermines the financial sustainability of our model . so i want to talk a little bit about making capacity for scaling co-ops sustainable. i talked a little bit about the need for city dollars areput into that kind of education and training capacity .so we've identified as an organization that in addition to the .5 fte resident coordinator built into

the budget, this is as i said roughly 60,000 to 75,000. so $50,000 cost in addition to that. i think it's critical that we have somebody who's a kind of centralized resident education coordinator was able to maintain the sort of ongoing education that is after those initial years may be anywhere between one and five years the resident outreach tornado bills into theproject but it's budget is working so someone who follows up on that work . and would be spread across more projects. so roughly i'm estimating we need one .5 fte annuallyto make this kind of a model work . >> i think maybe if this is unnecessary i will stop there . and i want to also take stock of the time. as i appreciate the opportunity

to present, i hope we will keep going withoutworking group . i heard visor melgar you're going to be convening your working group and i'm excited about that. we continue tofollow up with this work. muchexciting potential and possibility around co-ops . thank you . >> thank you so much ms. bailey. what a great presentation.you for your energy, your workand yourfearlessness . i appreciate you . i also understand you have to log off. because you have somewhere else to go but i want to thank you. that you invited tracy parrish who is the former executive director at san francisco community and an expert as well so as you exit we will have questions from her on the historical aspects of your wor . thank you somuch . >> thank you, i appreciate it. >> president: next we have erin leasing from the mission

economic development agency who will presentour vision of opportunities and challenges . welcome . >> afternoon supervisor. i greatly appreciate you having a community hearing on this issue. i want to the just if you would making sure that i can get access to my slideshow. >> might be changed. you are now presenter. you can see them on the top right. >> we can see you. >> good afternoon supervisors. i'm the director of community real estate. >> sorryto interrupt, we can

hardly hear you. you speak into the mic ? >> thank you. go ahead caroline. >>. >> and director of committee real estate at mission economic development agency based in th mission district . and wanted to really tr of what kathy and norma as well as townsend shared earlier. when we talk about what goes on behind the scenes of if we were to aggressive co-ops how would you make sure is that support system for co-ops, sharing first real estate stories for how we got into real estate as we think about how do we make sure we have co-op developers that can support the establishment of co-ops. what meta-has seen in the need for co-ops and lastly what needs to happen for a

successful program based on meadows experience . so going a little back and wanting to say that in 2014, it was a very different area for us. and racial equity is at the heart of this story . meta-in 2014 saw that in the mission district we were losing our families every week and this is because as remember we're in a different time now but i'm sure everybody remembers what it's been like in the last seven years where we were seeing families getting displaced as the tech economy was in full roar so meta-as a service agency that has been around for 45 years of bold move to decide to take on community real estate and become a developer.and in that process we decided that one of the main tools we wanted to use was the city's small type program which is also bee established with funding in

2014 . the program itself was legislated in 2009 funding came in place in 2014 and at that time we were innovating alongside the city to see how we can make small sites a program that can be viable with only $3 million at the time into now close to $25 million per year program and how can we make it a viable tool to really counter the displacement happening in the mission district and in san francisco overall. so fast-forward now six years later and we think that while there's been a lot of trial and error along the way it's also been successful. we'vebeen able to buy 33 buildings in just six years . pre-pandemic. and that was about 60 properties per year. what that represents. is about half $1 million in personal investment from meta-zone funds because at the

time when we were first starting out capacity was not estate in play.we took the lead and we were able to secure half $1 million, over half 1 million to be able to invest in the staffing to be able to start the first few years of the small sites program until it reallytook off . but what you see in green on this map are the buildings that we purchased early in the mission district but you also see me purchased in the one in the richmond as well as in supervisor preston's district. and we've also purchased in the 11 as well as in many in soma two. so just sharing the various areas that we've been able to purchase also took us telling staff from 1 to 18. and also having a board that was ready to govern with our service agency. the morning was certainly at

the time growing but needed to dramatically increase our goals and expertise in what it took to become fiscally responsible for a realistic program. and then having the in-house financial infrastructure to create this brand-new business line . of that team of 18 nine are dedicated to preservation and we've been managing all these buildings through the pandemic without any infection which means that we have also been managing for significant challenges that our tenants have hadeither in paying rent or in just leaving the city and leaving us with vacancies . so what we've seen is actually while we been buyingthese 33 buildings a number of these buildings have been ideal for co-ops . the buildings that have 40 to 50percent longtime tenants , these buildings, these tenants tend to have lived in the buildings for 10+ years and have some personal savings or assets from being rent control.

they would have been excited to contribute to the purchase when we first purchased these buildings. initial interested in looking at that opportunity to become longer-term homeowners. we because of thatsmall site program tend to be approached by tenants in 4 to 8 unit buildings . that's because the tenants can be organized moreeasily. as we seen co-ops can go to larger sizes . we just tend to experience the smaller size and we've also been seen that this is not one kind of building. in fact it's often buildings that have that diverse mix of tenants in income age and race. on class and we have a building with african-american teachers and seniors where weworked with reverend townsend to help get purchased through the small sites program . on. we were unable to purchase that would have had artists and bakery back of the house staff as well as contractors that would have been able to purchase the building if we had found alternative small sites

programs. so what did needs to and to make that successful? i'm sharing specifically from san francisco's only active preservation program for small sites program. this is an innovation that happened since 2014 and being able to acquire andrehabilitate existing apartment buildings , totaling between 4 to 25 homes was really a push to see how we could keep families that were on the private housing market in rental buildings. [please stand by]

and the management team. as saki was sharing earlier, that fee especially on the asset management or the stewarding side really is not significant for the building unless we can figure out a stronger model. and one way that meta has found to be able to make this happen is to have a consistent project

pipeline and when that project pipeline gets stopped because of various reasons including the pandemic or other desires to stop approving projects, then it really limits the ability to build the program and keep it tropic on the acquisition side and on the ability to make sure those buildings are in strong shape on the asset. while most cds primary set of buildings are buildings that are tax credit buildings, what we find, this is a certainly different animal, you know, where many families live and the financial model for the building and the developer

owner has different. they can contribute to the purchase of these buildings. looking at the building is a different model as we've seen nationally. is critical rather than treating them as tax critical buildings. the next is streamlining the marketing process. make is so that we have vacancies that are sitting for six months or more and this is during the pandemic. so it's rather frustrating and disappointing that despite multiple -- >> clerk: you've hit your ten minutes. >> oh, okay. that the for a short period of time. the last thing i would say is really that we're building a

shared evidence pool data. we should really be thinked about tapping into resident assets and this is a local financial investment and it should be both in program capacity as well as in the building in the cost market. thank you very much. >> supervisor melgar: thank you, very much. for all you do for our city and, next, we have someone officially on the hall of fame cos. the executive director of the urban home setting assistance for new york. i don't know if you remember, ms. director, but i talked to you many years ago and i was a staffer at the mayor's office of housing and we were trying to get something off the ground and we're still at it now on the board of supervisors. welcome. >> hi. thank you.

and i do remember very well and so, thank you, supervisor melgar and all the supervisors for inviting me. this was a wonderful hearing so far and there is not a lot. it's really almost everything that i would say has been said about really the pieces that are needed to support a vibrant co-op community. let me tell you a little bit about you have and what we do and then how that happens. if that's okay. if that's how you want me to proceed. so u-hab is getting close to 50 years old. it started in the early 70s in new york city when new york city had a large number of abandoned properties in many of our neighborhoods.

and the city of new york unlike a lot of other cities takes the ownership of those properties in those days when landlords didn't pay their taxes. so the city of new york had lots of abandoned buildings that they own. you have started some housing visionaries, some of whom many of you know don turner who is the founder of bridge housing and also my advisor and mentor and professor when i was in architecture school at u.c. berkley. so i have a close history with the bay area as well. so anyway. when you have what started, there was this very simple notion that people could with their own energy take over vacant abandoned building with

some contractor help and city financing and then could own them and run them and there was a strong believe that the neighborhoods particularly our neighborhoods that were experiencing abandonment where places where people live their lives. they were born where their kids grew up and they weren't places to be urban renewed and torn down and demolished, but they're places where people could and should and would sort of knit the fabric back together, build lives for themselves and take over these buildings and fix them up and do co-ops and so that's what we did. new york city abandonment. when i came from sacramento where i was working in the housing department in sacramento until prop 13, when

i came to new york city, new york city had just taken 11,000 properties from their owners for nonpayment of taxes. 4,000 of which were still occupied. and so a lot of us community groups, people living in the buildings, elected officials all got together and suggested the city might have a program where residents who lived in these buildings could take them over and manage them. so all of this came to pass. we did rehabs, self-help, and we had these programs where tenants to manage the buildings where they're living when the city took them over and what it resulted in is close to 1,500 buildings that make up 1,300 co-ops and about 30,000 unit s of limited. the average size of this

building is about 20 units in brooklyn and queens, they tend to be smaller buildings, four, six, eight buildings in harlem and the bronx. they could be larger buildings, but on average, they're 20 units. so u-hab was founded to first help home setters take over these vacant buildings, but as things went along, they were hired by the city to provide training for residents who were taking over buildings and to run them and to provide ongoing technical assistance to the co-op boards and members of the them when they became this project. we've had as you heard from ms.

brown and we actually do training almost every night of the week. i think tonight, there's a straining on wealth in the state so when there's a death of the shareholder, there can be an easy transfer. on wednesday, it's shareholder 101. what are your rights and responsibilities of the shareholders. and it just goes on a couple hundred nights a year of training. so training is an important part of what we do. ongoing technical assistance is an important part of what we do. being available to be able to call up and say, we have this issue, can you come out and help us. we need to do a budget, can you come out and help us.

we have an election. can you help us run and supervise and run an election and all those sorts of things that we do and that was supported by city contract in the past and hopefully will be again in the future. and but we also because we have so many buildings have a number of other programs that can grow out of of the economy to scale. we do purchasing the fuel for buildings. we have a insurance program to insure the building and i think it's about 600 buildings and it's about $2 billion worth of insurance through this group program. we are have an online bookkeeping program and we will do bookkeeping through buildings if they want we have a program to get solar panels and more importantly energy conservation and fish and

systems and electric heat even into our buildings and a whole variety of things that we can do. can we provide assistance to building and can we assist them, but we hear from buildings when a building's not paying a premium. we know that something's wrong so we have an early warning to be able to call a building and say is there a problem or did you just forget or whatever it is. 75% of our buildings are manageded by the residents themselves and we see no difference in the performance of buildings between the two categories. so that's sort of our range of

services buildings and doing this and ongoing training is one of those things. and provide sort of a certificate course board members and get elected and the wonderful thing about those trainings is a whole variety of co-ops meet together and they get to explain about all the work, but they get to learn how other people are solving issues and problems and also hear from others that they're jog but i

think what's certainly worked for us is because so many have supported us and others in this activity in providing support for these co-ops. mostly, consistently for 40 something years. and so from the time that we had just a handful of co-ops to now that we have 1,300 co-ops, there's been regular support. but another piece of what we did and has developed over the last two decades or actually three decades is something that i think a lot of people spoke to tonight which is, on the stewardship, the support right

into the of building and one of the things that we put in there is the monitoring fee. it's our proactive way of working with cowe will call them and say it's budget season. if you help that and we'll come out and meet with the board and go over it. it's time to file this, your reserves are required to be

this and we work with them proactively to try and get them to be able to do these. so let me. there's one other point that i would like to make a little bit about the development. when we do new york, the amount of money and it's expensive like it is and one of the things is that h.u.d. does and the 223f program but they

factor it global wide. and the other resource that we're seeing today and elsewhere is expiring tax credit projects. many of the tax credit projects had sale to the residents as one of the outcomes in the 16th year or when they were done and we need to hear from residents in buildings who would like to make that a reality. so it's an opportunity to preserve for permanently other buildings. and i can answer whatever else you want. >> supervisor melgar: thank you so much. you have been just an invaluable wealth of information. thank you so much. i look forward to continuing

this work with you. stick around. our last speaker from the housing organization who's going to wrap us up. mr. martin. >> great. thank you, supervisor. thank you to the whole committee and it's an honor to be on here with mr. reicher and ms. brown and reverend townsend and all of you doing this amazing work. i knew that. the council community housing organizations of which i am c-director represents housing advocates whom you've just heard from. while the housing affordability crisis has reached epic proportions with today's tech field the demand for the

affordable working class is nothing new. many of them funded by labor unions come to mind. the original vision of working class public housing in the late 1930s comes to mind and of course, here, the cooperatives we've been talking about from the 60s and 70s comes to mind whether funded through h.u.d. loans or labor unions. and, you know, when i think of that, i think what would it mean if we could be building right now 1,500 units of cooperative housing every decade, every five years, every year as people talk about the housing crisis and the need to expand supply. it's created 2.5 million homes across the country. it continues to be the main sourcing for affordable

housing. there are probably 20,000 to 30,000 units funded by them. we know for every new unit, there are hundreds of people waiting to get into those units. today, as we struggle with an affordable housing crisis that expands across the city is important that we innovate new direction. the interest is part of a statewide movement to mutual housing association. just last november, san francisco approved just today, a council of community housing organizations together with the san francisco labor council, published housing are workers and addressed the housing need told by workers themselves. the report finds that only 7%

of san francisco's unionized workers surveyed can afford san francisco market rate housing. including everyone from in-house supportive workers, to hotel workers, the kinds of workers who are often funded from teachers to health care workers to transit workers and electricians who have very little choices for affordable housing. it's time to once again start looking at limited housing equity cooperatives. not just a pathway for workers essential to our city, but as saki said, as a pathway to begin building equity for black and brown people who have been denied by generations of racism from accessing wealth building and equity. what we know from housing development here in san francisco is that to be successful, we need funding, we need land, and we need programs that work that are in place. proposition i demonstrates that

san franciscans are willing to support to provide housing innovations for affordable housing. the city needs to expand its support to provide predevelopment support. technical assistance to organizations. and others have said, what that support looks like has to be very culturally competent and directly involving the residents themselves and i think as both saki and caroline mentioned, things need to be changed to encourage real innovation. they also require commitment and ability to be flexible to grow and innovate. and we look forward to working with the supervisors, with the mayor's office of community housing and development and all of our community partners in san francisco's residents to develop new housing cooperative solutions. thank you. >> supervisor melgar: thank

you very much. i noticed that supervisor preston has to leave in a few minutes. we will at the time make a motion to excuse you and we will have supervisor chan come on for the rest of the meeting. i wanted to give you a chance to ask the rest of our presenters and answer all the questions that i have. >> supervisor preston: thank you. chair melgar, if i can just jump in because i will have to leave before the questions start and i just did want to say before i have to go and turn over my seat to supervisor chan with thanks for her covering me for the rest of this hearing. i just want to thank you chair melgar for elevating the issue of co-ops and it's something you and i have talked about, the real neglect of co-ops and the failure as a city for us to

really, you know, some individual cases that are exceptions, be you really if you look at a body of work. i mean, just have not invested like we need to in the strategy of co-ops and so i just really appreciate your elevating this, i know we've talked about this in the past, but i'm really looking forward to make sure we scale up. i think it's an integral part of that conversation and i very much appreciate all the presentations and look forward to. if i have questions after the hearing, i will follow up with some of the amazing presenters off line. i just did want to thank you for calling this hearing and thank all the participants who are working to get us there to really invest in all the co-ops

and things that have been stated. >> supervisor melgar: thank you, supervisor. supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: let me concur with exactly the words of supervisor preston as somebody who was involved in the 53 columbus, what we used to called fong building, actually, that has a fast ending history going back 100 years, but to the mid 1990s when interestingly enough, a public institution, city college purchased that building and the columbo building next door and slated that with a questionable relocation plan to relocate the residents to treasure island which was shocking then and remains

shocking now. i actually litigated that as a private citizen. this is before i was on the board of supervisors in the late 1990s and that litigation interestingly enough over deficiencies in ceqa. timing for that is good given some privileged people who do not understand what happened last week at 469 stevenson street and the resolution of that ceqa litigation which, by the way wasn't against the city. was against the city college who by the way exempted themselves from san francisco law as they could as a state agency resulted ultimately in city college building a campus a few feet away on an empty parking lot, on the same block,

actually, and selling that property at a rate at which was coupled with an appropriation that supervisor daily and i did in the day which was really money. it was you $1.5 million to get the land trust started on this project and to help move this towards an equity situation. but it was a one off and while to this day i actually still know both the families in their and asian law and it certainly

is something that should be added to the tool box as we're dealing with 100% affordable housing so thank you for daylighting that conversation and i look forward to helping you in any way that i can going forward. >> supervisor melgar: thank you so much, supervisor peskin. would you kindly make a motion to excuse supervisor preston? >> supervisor peskin: so moved. >> supervisor melgar: okay. before we make a vote, let's make a motion to excuse supervisor preston. >> clerk: on the motion to excuse supervisor preston beginning at 3:32 p.m., [roll call]

you have three ayes. >> chairman: thank you so much. do either of you have any questions for our presenters? okay. so i just have a couple questions for the mayor's office of housing. hello, welcome director shaw. >> hello, chairwoman melgar. can you hear me? >> chairman: yes. so one of the overriding commonalities and the presentation that we heard was the call for investment into the peephole structure that supports the co-ops. whenever we're needed, whenever there's a fight, we show up. we could think about creating the infrastructure of the.

>> yeah. and thank you very much and what a great hearing and i just want to note i think looking at this as a model of outcomes. i've been on board for ability two years now. there's been an evolving and growing narrative. we're making sure people weren't displaced and i think

we are we also have made a significant investment in mocd. our staff is now at 130 and really built up the infrastructure. so we're there with that mission. and i think right now, we're happy to innovate. so thank you for your leadership. i think you all heard in supervisor mandelman's district, we invest in our

first home ownership project. so this is a space where we're willing to continue and be really honest about where there's either expertise gaps. our gapping or limitations within national policy or different policies. i just want to let you know that i see this as limited equity as one tool or one approach that continues to advance how we bring this all together. and so we function from a one mocd standpoint in which housing, b.m.r. rentals and community development come together and we are approaching this opportunity to partner with you and learn with you

from that after hearing the presentation about the hearing about the flexibility that's needed to convert from having to preserve rental housing to co-op and we also heard from director ryker about the existence in availability of 213 and 2302 mortgage. so i'm wondering if with sort of getting expertise looking at other financing model so we can or refinancing the ones that they have so they remain

seasonable. >> so i think that answer is yes. it's small signs came out deeply out of preserving renters so they weren't displaced and that sense of urgency was such that there wasn't the space i think at the time to have the conversation around ownership as it is a think we still also have as we all shared a backlog in need. as you know, thousands of people are applying for hundreds of units and the question right now is how has this been to a space, but also creating that and so i think it is going to take some financing. i will also say, i think it will take from all of us from

what we've heard on small sites. me and saki have talked about us not coming from san francisco and so, once again, i really want to have that conversation on how to adjust our resources on how to advance this idea. and so i think you heard, i apologize, supervisor around we know there's a study and learning we have to do around demographics, around to the ability of sites. and what our expiring, what expiring affordability provisions. so there is a moment right now in understanding that universe to understand how we can make this opportunity happen. >> supervisor melgar: okay. thank you very much. and i can see that you're in your office again. >> i'm wearing the tie that's

what it is. >> chairman: i want to say you thank you so much for the presenters for starting this conversation. so we have the public comment line. if you have not already, please press star three to be added to the queue. for those on hold, please wait until you are unmuted. if you can unmute the first caller, please. >> hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: ma'am, you're unmuted. so you can begin.

>> clerk: it looks like she just dropped the line. let's take the next caller. >> caller: linda chapman. as the own are of a co-op until i was driven from the develop and as the owner of a condo now, i'm taking time out from a lawsuit against me that was instituted by the board president, life in these situations is not all happy and hard missed is the operative word. reform is the operative word. if you're going to put people into these situations luke my friends here which is one of the one thing you need to have funding for, the huge special assessments that will be coming that they will not be able to pay and they will lose their home. this is not theory, you know.

the woman $60,000. in the $100,000. and those are just three places and they have four months or six months to come up with them. my building was the same and at that time, i knew people in seven buildings where there were assessments of a million and $1.5 million a community land trust came in and likely said, what are you talking about? and they were going to buy buildings like this and put people with limited resources into they were not poor people, but they already had a mortgage

and property so there's a problem. okay. i have a lot of training. and i go regularly to the echo train which is statewide training you don't need to un. >> caller: good afternoon, members of the board. this is peter cohen.

but i want to emphasize a couple of things that were brought up that can come out of all the lodge and i have been in this housing space for a long time and worked with supervisors here and one thing that's fantastic about being in san francisco is you can test things out here in ways that you really can't do in other parts of the country. so we can play with things. we can make mistakes. we are a wealthy city so we can invest in some of the

experiments and we can come up with solutions and it fits nicely into our larger housing. and the way that the labor community at large is coming together with the housing to just help figure out how we can do more and co-ops is one of those great solutions. thank you again to you, supervisor melgar and all the cosponsors. thank you, supervisor melgar for having this important hearing and for your leadership. ensuring long term affordability and creating an alternative and empowering model for tenants in for the

creation to make this sustainable. we must assess the existing small sites and fix the piece that is are not working for neighborhoods across san francisco and doing the on-the-ground work to take units out of the speculative private market. thank you. >> caller: hi. i'm glad i made it on the line. i'm so excited. i just wanted to say, i agree

with what everybody is saying here. i work at the labor i just want to i know at least six generation families. we do that in intentionally. you have to work on it but it

and we just make up this family. we also are democratically run. we make sure we treat them well. lastly, it's the key, it's the community. it's so important that and something that has to go without saying. people know each other. we just had a huge we've been here since 1963. we will be here for another 50 years and i really encourage this discussion. i'm excited by this discussion. i really want to be apart of

it. >> clerk: next speaker please. we have one left in queue. if you would like to speak, thanks so much. >> good afternoon, supervisor melgar. i've had other kinds of alternative housing models and getting housing out of the for profit sector, it's really hard when you look at what houses sold for that you could move here in 1960 and buy a house for $20,000 or $30,000 and it's the same house today. so we have to look at these models. we have to look at the funding. the city bank can be part of that and we also need to put some pressure on the employment retirement system too. and another big opportunity

that exists right now is the small hotels that are available to be acquired. so let's look at rolling up our sleeves right now and helping tenants get into and we need to have community buildings in housing and also in our neighborhoods and thank you for this and i'm looking forward to the next steps. >> clerk: okay. madam chair, that concludes this item. >> chairman: thank you. with that, public comment is

now closed we continue to the call of the chair. >> clerk: on that motion, [roll call] >> chairman: thank you. please call item nurnl three. including with respect to the zoning administrator and other department staff. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item please call 4156550001 and then press pound twice. if you have not done so already, please press star three to line up to speak.

madam chair. >> chairman: thank you very much, madam clerk. thank you supervisor peskin, for introducing this item. >> supervisor peskin: thank you for not only scheduling this item. i know what you're going to bring to it. and really this was just an opportunity we have a relatively new director of the department and covid has made everything much more difficult relative to communication and collaboration not only with this department, but every department in the city. and often times and i'm sure it was the case this year as well. there's a little discussion during the budget about what the plans and priorities and divisions of a department are. but i thought we could use this as an opportunity to hear about that from the relatively new

director of city planning, your former colleague on the planning commission at director hillis and we've heard and i raised when i introduced this item about reorganizations and change in the planning department structure and maybe we can get a little bit of insight into what director hillis' vision was in doing that and how that helps meet the work goals and plans of the department. i know we now have a division of equity and what the plans are around that. so i thought we'd have a little bit of an open ended conversation. i do want to drill down as i said in the board of supervisor social security and we can get to that in due course in why the position of zoning administrator which as we all know is a charter authorized

position was reorganized to no longer be a direct report to the planning director, but we can get to that. i was hoping that we could just start with organizational issues and what's the impetus behind the reorganization and drill down into some of the things that we would normally talk about. obviously there's been a there's been so that's what i was hoping the city's actual policy body so with that, madam chair, happy for you or supervisor chan to weigh in at any time and if you don't have any questions or comments,

happy to hear from director hillis. >> chairman: welcome, director hillis. >> thank you for the opportunity to be here. and take the discussion where it may go. so thank you, chair melgar. good to see you all and thanks again for the opportunity to come and talk about the planning department. a just wanted to talked some of the shifts in the organization. i thought it was good before we talked about some of the recent changes. we've made some time during the office in 2020. and this is our current board structure in the first change was the creation as you mentioned supervisor peskin of

the community equity division within the budget. primarily, that was moving staff from city wide as well as supplementing that staff to create a new division. and the idea behind it was to elevate our work around racial and social equity and imbed that across all of our divisions. the three major priorities of the community equity division of our racial and social action plan both phase one which is internally focused in phase two which is externally focused. the division is charged, but working across divisions with developing our housing element and obviously working with you in the community. it's the first one that's focused and centered on on racial and social network. to do work not just focused on

but around sustaining communities. to add to our administration division because their work span divisions and we can realize some efficiencies by merging with staff doing similar work. we also shifted the sort short term rental division to be under the zoning administrator as you may recall. short term rentals. next slide, please. so in 2021, we made these additional changes which are less policy oriented and more geared towards organizational efficiency. we moved our housing team in the z.a.'s office under current planning. so, again, this is our current

work start. there's five divisions. there's the citywide group which does a lot of our long range planning and general planning work. plan use and community plans around transportation and sustainability planning. community equity i discussed earlier. our environmental planning division which you're familiar with conducts environmental reviews required under ceqa and does mitigation monitoring, current planning, projects, compliance with our code and the general plan and now enforcement in the z.a. functions. so to get into a little more detail up until this summer, we had a number of staff from different divisions involved in reviewing with the planning code and interpreting our code.

so the zoning administrator had some functions delineated in the code and in the charter. the z.a. hears variances, manages enforcement, does code interpretation which could be formal as part of published interpretations or z.a. bulletins or letters of determination, but also more informal office hours, e-mail exchanges with staff to interpret the code. i should also mention that the z.a.'s work has already even with z.a. as a separate office was already being done in collaboration with our current planning team. they may draft letters of determination. they staffed variances, etc. also, the office of the z.a. has historically and continues to take on other functions beyond those delineated in the charter in the planning code,

there's a liaison to the board of appeals. t.d.m. implementation, prop m and now prop b tracking and reporting as well as other functions. our housing and process team was housed in the director's office. and they are really the experts on that intersection between local and state housing laws and implementing our increasingly complex laws around housing. the state density now sb9 and 10 as well as local rules around inclusionary housing in home sf. [please stand by]

>> i don't show that shift in the slide itself. you are correct. prior to this there was a zoning and compliance division that included the va, enforcement and

some of the other things i mentioned that are programs beyond what is in the code that reported directly to me. >> we were happy to provide that for you. >> it is an interesting, either fish or foul. it is both a long term city-wide quasi use additional function and direct report of two and i think serves at the pleasure of the planning director, if i remember correctly. it is a civil service position. i was going to walk through the history and how it is configured within the planning department

over the years. they have taken on more and less -- well not more, sometimes much more and a little more responsibility than delineated in the code and charter. you will remember in the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s it served assistant director of implementation. if you didn't know about it you had heard of him. >> now to running current planning. za had this role assistant director of implementation. it would be analogous to saying this body who currently running planning would also be the za. in 2010, that was split.

za was in a separate stand alone division with other functions. enforcement, short-term rentals. correct structure brings za back. it is not the head of current planning. note throughout this. those core functions getting delineated in the charter as well as the code remain the same for the za. za has those same core responsibilities, same authority. under the current structure the za does a tremendous job with the same staff reporting to him. he reports differently to me. i don't review the za decisions. i generally don't get involved in the za decisions. on occasion i have asked to be briefed on a case for a

decision. i may even disagree with the decision that is made by the za. you may also. i think you talked about group housing or formula retail. i believe under the old structure and current structure under the bob path more structure the za continues to have that authority for those decisions. >> director, getting back into that last slide for a second. the real difference is between the two pre-existing models and the current model is really that in this case functions notwithstanding that there is a layer of management between the za and the director and historically in the pass more

era, i guess into the cheeverra model from the 1980s to 2010, i don't know when he started but and in the 2010-2021 model the za was always a dash line to the director. the difference isn't necessarily the function that is -- don't misinterpret this. it is in the hierarchy kind of a demotion? >> that core function is the same not the only difference between the pass more era to the sanchez era when it was stand alone and what it is currently. under the pass more/bagner era, the za had a lot more

responsibility. not written in the charter or the code. those core responsibilities remain the same. as i said za was assistant director of implementation. they were the head of current planning. it is if ms. wattty would also be the za. the only thing that is necessarily the wrong way to structure things or right way to structure things. i thought that -- let me jump to the next slide. this is where i think the rational for it was. really efficiency and good sharing from having staff review projects and review them to be compliant with the code being the same division. that is my biggest rationale for

doing that. this change is beneficial for staff development. to some extent we relied on the za. it isn't a big office, za and assistant za for code interpretation to interpret the code. i want to develop current planning staff to give them the ability to know why the za is making decisions. then reflect those in their own decisions. as i said, the za, where they interpret the code it could be formal through a letter of determination, also informal a staff person asking the za about a specific provision in the code which may not be an interpretation of the code. it may be how the code is implemented. a lot of that expertise and you have worked with the za, they have a great knowledge of the code. part of this is being able to

give our staff that same knowledge and house them in the same division. the same goes for our housing team. the housing code states locally is complex. we had that division to the side. not parked. it was within executive programs. i just thought it was best served to have that in current planning. planners need to understand these complex rules around housing projects. you know they grow every year. sb9, 10 this year and others as we go along. it is beneficial to have that knowledge and expertise in one place. private place. 450 o'farrell street which you heard has housing issues around the state and federal rules, code interpretation rules around group housing, it has planners

looking at the project and interpreting or implementing the code associated with that project. that expertise is best served in one division. not taking away any of the authority or core duties of the za. >> i am thinking about others. there are many models in city government that i am thinking about is an interesting one to the chief health officer is an with the board of supervisors under state law. that is the head of population help within the department and has been bestowed this chief health officer designation

nobody knew how important it was until we had a pandemic. that individual has always been a direct report to the because of the importance of that position. direct report to dr. colfax or ms. garcia or the head of the department of public health. it seems like what you are saying, and i am not speaking to whether it is quarantine or sanchez or larry before that or for 37 years bob, god rest his soul. i am speaking to the position. i think you are acknowledging. you are saying this is a role that is important in policy. a role in interpretation. quasi judicial and formal and informal staff training and

being a resource to that staff. not only me i went to reaching out to a number of former directors. that kind of function and the import of that position which the charter says is an important position and charter authorized position. it doesn't say where it goes. i am not saying you are not within the right to do it. the import of that position is somewhat undermined by the reorganizational structure. i don't want to dwell on that too much. >> you make a good point. i don see how it is -- i don't see how it is undermined. i don't stick with the zoning administrator. the only thing the charter gives the zoning administrator is opine on variances. i don't it is with the zoning administrator and review or

discuss his or her decision or letter of determinations. i don't know how it changes their ability to make that independent decision. i may question, i may disagree. i also think you could say ms. watting should be the zoning administrator. the head of current planning. if you look how other planning agencies are around california or around the country are organized. it is a unique position. sometimes the zoning administrator is a different role as the commission. sometimes the director, sometimes it is the head of current planning. sometimes it is someone who hears variances. what people call the zoning administrator, what the zoning administrator does is not consistent across planning

departments even in california. i like the fact that the zoning administrator position is a civil service position. the zoning administrator position would say the head of current planning would serve as my pleasure. i actually think it gives the zoning administrator a bit more authority and comfort to make a decision i may not agree with or the commission may not agree with or you may not agree with to have it as a civil service position. >> i am getting more clear the fact the director can hire. what you are saying and this never occurred to me. the director can't fire because it is a tenured position. >> civil service position, correct. >> you can only really fire for

cause or lack of performance or something like that. this was not part of my thinking until this moment. let me absolutely agree with you, which is there is notic model for this interesting role of zoning administrators across all planning departments, counties, cities. except for the fact they do variances everywhere and find hardships and that provision in our code is very similar to the zoning administrator in town of alameda or city of los angeles. you are right. relative to their roles and responsibilities they can be quite different. i mean all i have here is san francisco's own history, which as you say the zoning administrator has been direct

reporting to director of planning for eons. i don't want to belabor this too much. i think part of this is really about a nuance relative to how zoning administrators and directors interact. no over day-to-day stuff, but you can find the hardship for the rear deck in the backyard or what have you. over the higher profile issues of the day where the directors and zoning administrators need to on the one hand honor professional planning doctorrins and planning codes. on the other hand have to be sensitive to the politics of the day. i will leave that there. go ahead if you want to jump in. >> i get it. i see your point. like you, i spoke with other zas

and former planning directors about this. if you talk to mr. vadner he would tell you he spent less than 15% of his time on zoning administrator duties. the role and where you put it changes. my interest as what was really there is great staff. i think mr. t does a great job and ms. wattty does a great job. i am trying to get planners to understand because it is so complex. in part it comes from learning, being with, seeing in action colleagues like ms. wattty and mr. t. on the housing side miss conner

and others in the housing world. the code is extremely complex. having folks that understand that and not siloing that is valuable to the entire department. >> again, i don't want to spend a disproportionate amount of time on this. i can circle back to the zoning administrator. i was hoping to touch base on the umbrella of different functions within the department. obviously current planning we all know because that is where the pressure is to get permits out the door and obviously housing is the issue of the day. there is an emphasis on that locally from this board of supervisors and the mayor as well as you mentioned, cascading amounts of preempttory legislation from the state everybody is trying to figure

out and you are issuing different bulletins on. it is unknown areas of law. some of it is not resolved for years without additional pieces of more clear legislation from the state or case law that is yet to be made. it is a new frontier. i acknowledge that it is interesting. put all of that nza in the parking lot. i want to drill down to what city-wide is doing, what the new equity division is doing, what their work plans are, how are we doing on staffing, how many f.t.e. across divisions, what it means for analysis function to move from city-wide to the admin. i just want to -- really what your vision as a former planning commissioner and new director,

relatively new director of the department is and how the organizations are meeting that. this is really kind of, you know, check in. it has been, as we all know, a weird almost two years. you don't get good or bad timing in the middle of that. i want to get a soup to nuts. when we talk about the benefits of efficiency, what those are. how that is realized. we are talking about staff development. who is tasked with staff development, how that is working. anyway, back to you, director. >> just a couple more points. you asked about the budget. the next slide this is where the

venue comes from. 72% from fees and charges for services. 12% from general fund. that is fluctuated over the years. if you look back a decade or so. we were talking about this at the senior manager meeting. a third of the budget was derived from the general fund. low of 5 or 6%. that number has fluctuated over the years. next slide shows where we spend that money. the bulk of our budget expenditures are staff. 16% of staff dedicated to project work. that is the current planning division in our environmental division. 21% from what i call broader policy work. city-wide division in our community equity division. we are seeing continued drop off in fee revenue.

i think pre-pandemic we were starting to see decline in fee revenue. that certainly was exacerbated by the pandemic. i think we had $10 million, $8 million shortfall this year. we were starting to see some more promising trends on revenue. i think even though we reduced our budget shortfall but we are trying to get a handle on exactly how much that is going to be. it could be again in the 5 to $10 million range. we do. we are able to keep positions vacant to cushion some of that revenue shortfall. 4 million-dollars worth of vacant positions currently which we will continue to keep vacant until we know where our revenue picture is going. as far as on the policy side.

priorities certainly you mentioned it. supervisor peskin you are dealing with community stabilization. i hope housing element is a place where you can have those discussions and set the city's policy about housing. we don't make the planning code or the general plan. you are the policymakers. i hope that could be a forum and it is a priority on our strategy as a city around housing. we are clearly implementing state legislation in working with you all on your agendas. four plexes, co-op housing as you talked about, chair melgar today. housing was when i started

pre-pandemic the biggest issue we face in affordability and continues to be an enormous issue and challenge. what is different is the impact of the pandemic in responding to changing land uses. our retail and commercial corridors clearly define san francisco and make this a city of neighborhoods which makes san francisco special. beings able to continue to fill vacancies and be flexible and add daptto a changing retail climate sharing spaces or prop h and recent legislation we are focusing on that. as well as changes to other land uses, pdr, lab space or office space. the work in our community equity division i touched on the housing element. we are trying to build our

community-based planning work around cultural districts and vulnerable neighborhoods. not necessarily working with neighborhoods, with the goal of changing the planning code but working with them to implement their vision of what the neighborhood should be. that is a little bit of shift in how we are doing work as planners. again we are looking to build complete communities so that is this department to work on transit and add dapting to climate change. just to touch on some of the bigger priorities. >> going down to actual facts of this $62 million total budget and 250 full-time equivalents. are those actual full-time or is

that your annual salary ordinance authorized positions? >> i believe those are the actual filled positions. i would say the vacancies are across divisions generally. that is probably budgeted numbers. vacancies are generally across positions. it is probably similar the percentage of our budget in the different divisions. >> do you have a chart that shows. i guess it was five divisions now what is vacant in each? my understanding and correct me if i am wrong is that the city-wide forward planning, future planning, planning, planning, not permit issuance, code compliance stuff, that equity division was carved out

of city-wide planning. i believe the analysis function was a functional transfer within the department from one division to another. do you have a -- you used to have a cool thing. i can't find any more that had all of the different people who occupied those different positions and what was vacant. does it exist any more? >> we just went through that. we can show it to you right now if you would like to see it. i don't think you will see it on the screen. i think that is it. not readable in this format. we can send you that. we can send you that by division. what we do further is to delineate positions vacant over a year. we have had vacancies that have

been long standing. then there are the current vacancies that exist in the department. if there is a particular division you want me to scroll down? >> city-wide planning, i assume this is meat with out equity division and without the analysis unit. i am doing a quick -- like here you have got about 27, 28 positions with six vacancies. kind of getting on to a quarter vacant in the remaining stuff in that unit?

>> right. >> is there a freeze? are those filled? how is that working these days? >> across the department we generally have a hiring freeze right now. when we were anticipating our revenue we filled a dozen plus positions. i have had to put the brakes on filling new positions because our revenues over the last couple months aren't coming close to meeting how our budget for the current year which is reduced from prior years. >> as you have become much more reliant on fee revenue. this is before my time this was an apfund department and -- cap

fund department and now it is entirely fee dependent. i get that. chair melgar, you know more about this than i will ever know. feel free to jump in and comment or say things i am not even thinking about. is there relative to the equity division's goals which you have laid out a little bit. you said there is an inward facing task. that is moving to outward facing task. it sounds like general planning around what general plan elements? >> how the element is done through the equity team. it is in concert with city-wide's love. part of that implementation goal is to look at building additional housing on the western side of the city. that will be looked at and

implemented with our city-wide team. >> when that inward and outward facing is done, will the equity continue to be standalone, will be back in city-wide planning and equity outcomes will be into all of the divisions of planning? what is the vision there? >> that is the work we are doing within the equity division. that is why it is its own division. it is our standard operation embedded in all divisions in the community equity division. it could be merged back into city-wide. >> is there a time horizon for that? >> no. i would say my hope is five

years. >> can i jump in? >> director hillis and i when i was on the planning commission talked a lot about this component of the planning department staff. i support positions making sure this is in every single, you know, area of the planning department. i don't know if you have seen this but a few years ago the department did a study of the demographics of the planning department staff. it found that the leadership of the department and planner 1, clerical, everything else at the the-- bottom of the work chart d

not match. i feel very deeply you cannot plan for a city unless you understand that city, the communities. you understand its struggles, vision, dreams happy. having the community equity component is essential as we shift towards. you think that the affordability challenges, climate crisis, all of the changes we are going through. these divisions look very different than the rest of the defendant staff. i think it is great we are doing this. i look for war to this being part of everything else. thank you for bringing it up.

>> i think we are all on the same page and want to make sure that work plan is implemented. i think we all hold you in high esteem. we are all down with that. bouncing over to analytics function. can you tell us what the thinking was on that? >> city-wide and other divisions will be working with our data section as if they are the client of our team. that would be for reports like our housing reports that we produce. it could also be for managerial reports. how many units of housing are in

the queue or for environmental team. there were elements within the administration division as well as that capacity was built in the city-wide division. i think both of them had staffing challenges. the idea was to consolidate them to build their capacity. >> i would like to build it even more to work with city-wide or current planning. >> is it working? >> our challenge is staff on this. we have built this capacity in the city-wide team. they were great in building it. we still have challenges. system challenges. we operate on a different system than our colleagues.

figuring that out and making the systems talk to each other is a technical job. working with the city-wide folks to produce reports to inform you where housing is being built and the types of housing being built. we need that data to be right to give accurate reports. i think it is working. it hasn't been a ton of time. >> can you tell us around all organizational elements whether it is what we just discussed relative to analytic function or carving out equity division or the more hot-button issue, the change from decades of patterns. the role and function of the zoning administrator. what the process was as to how you reached that conclusion? did you do it in conjunction

with planning or -- i know you didn't do it in conjunction with board of supervisors nor do you have to. did you do it in conjunction with the mayor's office. past planning directors have met with the mayor on a weekly basis. does that still exist? >> i meet with the mayor regularly. i don't get into these discussions. policy discussions we have around housing and housing issues. no, i didn't necessarily get into the details of this. it was more internally talking to the senior leadership team here, staff, past directors. i don't think you needed to go to an action of the commission. certainly like the community equity shift, our commission got

the resolution. that was in response to that. it was something we were thinking of already and had in the works. i don't think any of these are huge shifts. term, part of what is happens is as revenues go down less funding. some of these are in response to this. trying to be more efficient with the pandemic and less revenue. some are policy driven like community equity division. beyond that one, i call these not significant shifts. more reflecting how we work current bely. especially the za shift. that is how we work.

if you have a variance there is a current planning staff person that is working on that case. maybe writing the variance. attending the variance hearing. the planning staff may draft the initial lod. that exchange of how our code works and is interpreted was happening anyway. >> i disagree with you. i would say we are at in society and be the city government, the equity division wasn't a big shift. that has become normal standard operating procedure across the departments, across agencies, across governments. >> i would invite you to talk to the department whether they think it is a big shift how we are doing the work around long-range planning.

>> i hear you. when institutions have not been honored and have been excluded that can be a shift. when i was on the coastal commission in 2017, we were starting to do that. it is becoming more commonplace in government. i am not saying it is easy but we all agree it is very important. i am not belittling it in any way. we would all agree that it's a welcome and ubiquitous change happening across agencies. we are now doing that as a city-wide function that supervisor fewer started,

supervisor chan's predecessor. the za shift in terms of historic patterns and practice and issues of the day is larger. the more i think about it, i don't know how many former planning directors are still alive. i think there are four. i have consulted with half of them that represent the last generation at least. i don't want to put words in their mouth. they come from it wasn't broke it didn't need fixed perspective. i think there are only two zoning administrators that are still alive, well, maybe three county the current b-1. my recollection is that

mr. batter didn't oversee current planning. for many years we had a separate chief of currenting back in the case of my nemsis anne kelly who were in charge of current neighborhood planning. called different things over the years. that is my recollection for what it is worth. >> i get it. things have been structured differently over the years. if you back the charter or code. the za has specific functions. those are added on to that. we do it currently when mr. badner or pass more was the za. it was added on to even more.

talk to mr. badner. 10% of the time was focused on what is in the charter and the code. i get it. substantively. you know why you are concerned about that? i don't want to get involved in the za's decisions. ms. wattty is not involved in the za decisions. you have disagreed over the last month or so with the za decisions. i have as well. we have to respect that position and the authority that position has. i will continue to do so and you can certainly call me here if you think otherwise. >> supervisor chan has a question. >> i am happy to define to supervisor chan.

the more the merrier. hospital in. >> thank you, chair melgar. this adds to the questions what supervisor peskin is good at. i am happy to defer back to his line of questioning. i think that i do not understand the planning department structure. i think i am curious about this question about the zoning administrator's role. most importantly about the decision-making process. i think that for any organization, not just planning department. in a moment when you are reorganized the question led back to what is the

decision-making process? are you going to identify and protect the integrity of the expertise and not expect the consensus of decision making. the expertise is long. how do you reach that balance with your reorganization that you do protect the integrity and expertise of your zoning administrator? i get it. you are saying. hey, we need to share information so other staff has the knowledge. the question i have from a lay person how do you protect that decision-making process during your reorganize? >> if that is in our department the responsibilities of the za. i will certainly maintain the

role of the za and responsibility of the za. ms. wattty will do the same. supervisor chan, you strike a great point. getting that knowledge and not having it siloed off on what they do and the decisions that the zoning administrator makes. a planner may go during office hours and ask about a specific issue and how we interpret the code on a specific issue. it is not helpful to have 8 planners asking the same question. getting that knowledge from the zoning administrator to the rest of the staff is important to groom and look for the next zoning administrator. to build our capacity around

understanding, implementing and applying our code. >> what if there is disagreement among the peers? >> if it is a problem of the zoning administrator, the zoning administrator makes the call. group housing. you all had the issue what group housing is and how we fine group housing. the zoning administrator mentioned what it was an interpretation made by mr. bagner back when he was zoning administrator. >> i do not agree with the interpretation. it is our current interpretation. some of you expressed some skepticism. one, you have thible to change

the code and make it clear around group housing so that that becomes clear. it is not necessarily michael on that. i respect your authority as well as the zoning administrator's authority on that. >> thank you. >> i appreciate that interaction. part of it is, look, the 11 members of the law making branch of the government, the board of supervisors preside over everything from the admin code to the health, planning building code and public works and tax code. there are a million things. i was aid to commissioners over. >> commissioner: s. port, health, planning. and to director's and senior

staff. we need to fix it box before we do. what i welcome and i will use this as an opportunity to say this t.do you see a path this board of supervisors should legislate over? we can initiate that and that is in the process of being initiate. it is great if the director says 2004 interpretation that is gathering dust for a decade and a half now everybody realizes it wasn't the best interpretation you guys should legislate over. i bet 11 members of the board would see it before we did. it is a two way street. i hear you. when we were having that hearing

around the issue. the current zoning administrator was candid. he was very clear that there was no room to further stretch that interpretation that some people wanted to stretch further. let me say i mean in some ways the zoning administrator's role is apart from the current planning and who they are in charge of is a quite sigh judicial role. that should be respected. there is an actual way for the public and members of the board of supervisors to deal with a decision that they disagree with. it can be appealed to the board of appels, legislated over in the same way when a court makes a decision about legislation,

the columnists or ledge lameter can override the court. those checks and balances are in the system. when it comes to retail mr. keith interpreted the formula retail law correctly. i wasn't happy about it. there is a way to move that forward to honor his interpretation. i don't have to agree with the zoning administrator all of the time. i worry optics of demotion is not personnel matter. i want that to be clear. this is about the position and

inand optics of independence and standing. that has troubled me and past directors for what it is worth. optically can't control what happens. i can control how the staff gets knowledge. it was the right decision to make. i could have kept reporting to me. i could have made the planning director. i didn't think that was appropriate. too much of current planning with code interpretation work because of the zoning administrator.

>> i i know this is going a long time. a few housekeeping questions. there are members of the public to weigh in. that might spur more questions. relative to and again everything has been made more difficult by covid. relative to your direct reports from zoning administrator to division heads, are you doing performance evaluations in your relatively new role as director? >> i don't know if i am exactly current on them, but yes. >> can you give me some background be into and maybe -- i don't know if you know or not. why zoning administrator bulletin number one was repealed. that is the zoning administrator bulletin to allow property owners to cost-effectively add

live valuable space to their homes. >> it is the room down one? >> yes. >> rooms down this is an example what you talked about interpretations made by the zoning administrator are outdated. rooms down was a time when we were as a city trying to discourage illegal units being built where there was no path to built. if somebody came from with remodel behind the garage. they wanted to add a master bedroom and bath behind their garage. there was no expansion of the footprint of the building to trigger planning review. we got involved because the

zoning administrator bulletin put out in the 1970s. they was trying to get at people illegally putting in units. supervisor preston. we have been trying to encourage property owners to put in units. and have made the legal pathway to do that easier and the state has taken advantage of that as well. that is an example of the bulletin outdated. >> i agree with you. i was ahead of my time in 2003 when i tried to create the framework that lost 6-5. don't be we still want to thank

toes built and collect your fees. bulletin number one makes it harder to track new units being built? >> i think where it is penalized. when it someone who didn't want to put in a bedroom with a bathroom. it triggered our review. tremendous cost. maybe a $5,000 fee from d.b.i. it became a $10,000 fee from us. how you had to configure the staircase was out voted and outdated. we charged project sponsors a

significant amount to review a permit to try to figure out whether they were putting in an illegal unit be when they wanted to sad bathroom behind their gram. >> what about the proceeds? >> when someone didn't want to put in a.d.u. it would trigger review of someone who wanted to add a bathroom to the down stairs behind their was -- their garage. it costs time and money to do insignificant remodel that would cost them money and review by us. unnecessary step given the legislation i packed by you buy the others to encourage a.d.u.

many simpler to put in. when public comment is happening the director can get us how many f.t.e. authorized by the budget. home fills and where they are across divisions. that would be good to continue checking in from time to time as our relatively new director embarks on his season. >> relatively because of covid. >> with that, madam clerk, let's go to public comment. >> our support today for public

comment will see how many callers are in the queue. press star 3 to be added to the queue. on hold continue to wait until you are unmuted. we have three listeners with one in queue. unmute if the caller, please. >> linda chapman. so much to say. so little time. i feel hopeful about the new director. [indiscernable] in contrast to the last director who even though we had the chance to have 52 units of senior housing on nob hill [indiscernable] saving the main part of the building supervisor peskin wanted to save. he did not cooperate. believe it or not he would say i

want to buy it. how did i buy it. he would not put it as an alternative. there was an interest in them. i am seeing that very different. the planning commission is getting terrible staff. the director has been there 10 minutes. they have to make a decision. i feel compassion. they get crap thrown at them. i mean they were to decide on the spur of the moment whether they were going to allow waiting all of those things. as the former share they they can't be waved. putting people in housing with

dead bodies. that's what they get without consideration can this work? where has this been done? how do you put electric lights on the roof to make them work? they rely on people calming from. >> $540,000 lower polk neighbors recommended. [indiscernable] that was a brilliant be plan. now we have five listeners. three in the queue. next caller, please.

>> david os good. i would like to commend the planning department staff who enforced regulations as best i can tell they do very good things under very trying conditions. they catch a lot of flag, unfortunately, they are way under funded and we need a lot more of them. every few years i will work on an issue that is important and not getting much attention. i noticed all too often planning department staff will take an advocacy role to promote a project by legislation instead of providing tooral analysis. i oppose supervisor stefani's ordinance to allow mcdonald's

and storefronts to have two signs. this matter may be before this committee in a couple weeks. they can only have a sign on an awning. >> you have to stay on the subject matter. item 3 is the organization of the practices of the planning department. adjust your public comment. >> just getting right to that. the stefani ordinance would allow the doubling of the number of signs. proponents emphasize the adding of lettering of and anythings and downplay additional projection signs. staff do the same thing. in fact at the october 7th commission meeting their artwork clearly emphasized addition of

lettering on awnings. and deabout fiesed in projection signs. >> thank you so much. next speaker, please. >> david pilpal. good afternoon. after covid i have tried and been unable to reach anyone by phone in environmental planning. perhaps that will change today with the return to work policy. i did refer to 4.105. planning code 305-307. administrative code 2a.51. there may be other code sections to those same on point on question of planning department

organization and the za function. it is pretty clear to me that the planning director can reorganize. at the same time the board of supervisors can require by ordinance in the planning code or the administrative code 2a.51 how the planning department might be organized or propose a charter amendment to change charter section 4.105. i don't plan the planning department has jurisdiction like m.t.a. or p.u.c. nor should it. i hope we agree the zoning administrator should be independent. i do think people like allen jacobs, mary gallagher were they all here would agree with that. this was a civil conversation

this afternoon. i think it is covering up serious management and policy disagreements between be the planning department or director and the board of supervisors. this was a civil conversation. there are different ways to organize the planning department. thank you for listen. >> we have one more caller in the queue. >> good evening, supervisors. i as a constituent want to say the planning department is cause of several crisis in the city. i can think of no better thing than abolishing it. it is noted to continuously be

corrupt. it has adus function with corruption from the mayor on down in our city at every level in every conversation. it is causing housing crisis. dysfunction. 30, 40-year-old buildings thanks to dysfunction of this department. completely unacceptable, dysfunctional. one of the worth pieces of the city. it causes serious disagreements and one of the most highly debate issues. if the planning department was functional we couldn't see the housing crisis today. we wouldn't see homeless crisis today, we won't see the wealth distribution we have today. it is destructive and they should be eliminated or strongly

reformed in the most democratic way. that is not with internal power deciding how the corruption is going to survive the new round every form when they have continuously demonstrated they are unwilling to transform themselves to public corruption. i am asking you to eviscerate this dysfunctional organization. thank you for your time. >> one more caller. >> this is sue. i disagree with the previous speaker. the zoning administrator has serious roles. the fact the planning code is not the only code that affects the planning of projects. specifically the administrative code including the rent control

provision which planning staff doesn't really know. they include the residential hotel provisions which is where we get the kitchen definition because the whole thing that the zoning administrator has done. how do you determine a kitchen by a gas connection? the planning department needs to be in other codes and instruct on those codes. secondarily, d.b.i. has a real influence over planning. when the planning department approved the project and sent to d.b.i. d.b.i. has full charge of the project. they don't have the same planning process. they have resisted having acela

which someone has to stuff down their throats so everyone can figure out where the project is in the review process right now and who is doing it. d.b.i. has thrived on collection. that is something that planning department, i think planning department was more focused on reviewing projects and getting them out because their revenue depends on it. there needs to be a backing off because what is housing that is needed in san francisco? i don't think luxury housing like the studios. [indiscernable] >> that was our last speaker. >> thank you, madam clerk. supervisor peskin.

>> just a few things to wrap up. one is to and as i said two-way street to -- >> let me make sure public comment is now closed. thank you. >> thank you, madam chair. as i was saying earlier two-way street. one is to candidly encourage director hillis to not be a stranger. i was at the dedication of the phase two of jefferson street improvements on fisherman's wharf a couple fridays ago to see completed. i am the person who has been around forever i was recalling how it initially came about which was when then for his

third or fourth or hundred path time as planning director dean came along and said, supervisor, what do you need in your corner of the world? i was like fisherman's wharf needs planning. he said i think i can absorb that in my budget or get me more money as add back. that led to a great yearlong community planning process and design that eventually ended up in a plan that eventually ended up a couple years ago or last year or year before we put general fund money into it. now that community is being admitted back with pedestrian improvements. same on pacific avenue in the north east corner of the city

that i represent where an outmoded plan was very automobile based on pacific avenue was proving itself to be exactly what it was. planning department said, hey, we get a person from city-wide planning to revisit that. couple years later that plan was updated. it was written and it still has a good shelf life. i say that as words of welcome. i wanted to get an answer on the f.t.e. thing which would be helpful for all of us to understand and maybe it is a policy shift we put our money where our mouth is. not make this a fee based department which comes with it

is always about current planning and permit issuance and less emphasize on city-wide planning. knowing what the vacancies are and where they are is a helpful policy point for this body come next year and the year after that. i want to get an answer to that and i want to ask two thorny questions that i will leave until rich answers the f.t.e. question. >> on the f.t.e. we have 29 vacant be positions. 20 total. -- 250 p.four in community equity and one in my office. >> so in terms of percentages i

thought community was a 12 person shop that is a third, is that true? did i make that up? >> it is bigger than that. >> we can take this offline. it would be interesting to figure out percentages by division. then as to the questions. i know that supervisor chan will appreciate this. can you tell us what and i have honestly lost track. relationship between planning department and friends of city planning and how that works these days? >> none. city plans is dissolved we would have no relationship with them. there were grants in process. we terminated our work with them in accepting any of their grant revenues. >> when did that happen?

>> it happened when the mayor issued the director. i don't know exactly the time. the mayor put out the directive on friends of groups in severing those ties. we did that then. we had grants in progress. we didn't complete the grants. >> okay. that is music to this supervisor's earrings. last question. can you explain and this is a couple short weeks in late march, early april advertisement for manager 3 deputy director of current planning that was withdrawn. can you give us the back story. >> that is rich sukray who filled that. that was backfilling liz

wattty's position. jeff was the head of planning and he left. wattty was in that position and she backfilled her position. >> that was actually filled by rick sukray in that period? >> yes. >> thank you. i look forward to working with you over the coming year and years. thank you, madam chair for accommodating this. i would love to continue this to the call of the chair if that is the will of the body. >> supervisor chan has a question or comment. >> thank you, chair melgar. what i wanted to ask is similar to what supervisor peskin talked about. this is a two-way street. i look forward to those collaboration and partnerships. i want to put a little nugget to director hillis.

to say that i look forward to working with the planning department along with my colleague supervisor peskin about the preservation of japan town community. you know, seeing there is a chinatown plan and there were some efforts in 2013 to really preserve and support japan town community, seeing that especially with this pandemic. there is a lot of challenges added to what the community was already trying to do before pandemic. moving forward just by your budget and staffing. i hope that there is really thinking of a commitment to preservation of communities. in this case i really urge you to think about the japan town community. thank you. >> i look forward to working with you on that.

japan town i worked on in the office of economic development back in the day when it changed hands and we worked on covenants and s.u.d. with supervisor. i have had meetings with the community. we want to be their technical experts in preserving japan town. we stand ready to work with you on the community. >> look forward to it. thank you, chair melgar. >> thank you, supervisor chan and supervisor preston. there is a motion on the floor to the call of chair. pleasetay role. >> supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston -- i'm sorry supervisor chan. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar.

>> you have three ayes. >> motion passes. thank you very much for attending director hillis. >> thank you, chair melgar. >> thank you. madam clerk will you please call the last item, number 4. >> ordinance amending the planning code to repeal article 12 which contains regulations governing land use activities associatessed with oil and glass exploration, development and possessing affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmenttal quality act. call 415-655-0001 and press pound twice. press star three to peak. >> madam chair. >> supervisor chan thank you for this piece of legislation. we continued it from last

meeting. we did hear the presentation and took public comment on it. you know we held it because there were some amendments not ready by the city attorney. i will turn it over to you. >> thank you, chair melgar and thank you colleagues for area patience. my apologies it was not ready last week. i will jump into it. i am so proud of kelly on our team that made the presentation and brought it forward to you last week. if may i would like to jump into making the motion to amend the legislation now that the language is provided by the city attorney and circulated among the committee and the clerk. i will read it into the record of these amendments. we need to amend the long title after processing and amending the definition of heavy

manufacturing one and two to exclude oil and gas production for fuel purposes for allowable industrial uses. page 12 line 5 section 3 the planning code is amended revising 102 as follows. page 12 line 11 excluding such product used sources and page 12 line 24 to add excluding such products used solely as fuel sources. they are supmentive. this item will be before you again next week. i do see that there is staff aaron starr. i appreciate aaron and his team to assist us through the planning commission hearing and help with these amendments. i look forward to your support.

i am happy to move this forward after aaron and staff from planning department comments and after public comment. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor chan. do you want to provide comments to the amendments read into the record by supervisor chan? >> thank you, supervisor chan for the amendments. it is heavy manufacturing two and three, not one and two. i would like that clarified. >> my apologies and thank you for the correction. >> thank you so much. madam clerk, supervisor chan has made a motion to move the amendment to the legislation. can we please take roll on that motion. >> we will need to provide public comment prior to the roll

call. >> public comment. >> we have joe supporting us tonight. checking to see how many callers are in the queue. please press star 3 to be added the queue. the system will indicate you have raised your hand. wait until you are unmuted. two have two with us this evening. with one person in the queue. unmute the caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am paul wimmer. i am happy to see these recommended planning department amendment has been adopted. the san francisco climate emergency coalition is pleased to see this legislation move forward. i would note that we did also suggest that some legislation should be needed to address the

use of the current river oil field land which is up in the air and may be sold. we have the keep it in the ground resolution. if we sell the stuff so it is taken out the of ground by somebody else it doesn't meet the intent. i would encourage future legislation to address that matter. thank you very much. >> thank you. that is the last caller in the queue. >> thank you, madam clerk. public comment is closed. now can we take roll call on the motion for the amendment. >> the motion as stated by supervisor chan. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor chan. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar.

>> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> supervisor chan do you want to make a motion to send it to the board? >> i think because it is substantive you have to continue for one week. i would make a motion to continue to next monday land use november 8th. >> on the motion as stated as amended to november 8th meeting. >> supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor chan. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> that motion passes. thank you very much. congratulations supervisor chan. madam clerk do we have any more business for the committee today? >> that concludes the business for this evening. >> we are adjourned. thank you so much. >> see you all later.

. >> president yee: of the 26 neighborhoods we have in west portal, it's probably the most unique in terms of a small little town. you can walk around here, and

it feels different from the rest of san francisco. people know each other. they shop here, they drink wine here. what makes it different is not only the people that live here, but the businesses, and without all these establishments, you wouldn't know one neighborhood from the other. el toreador is a unique restaurant. it's my favorite restaurant in san francisco, but when you look around, there's nowhere else that you'll see decorations like this, and it makes you feel like you're in a different world, which is very symbolic of west portal itself. >> well, the restaurant has been here since 1957, so we're going on 63 years in the neighborhood. my family came into it in 1987,

with me coming in in 1988. >> my husband was a designer, and he knew a lot about art, and he loved color, so that's what inspired him to do the decorations. the few times we went to mexico, we tried to get as many things as we can, and we'd bring it in. even though we don't have no space, we try to make more space for everything else. >> president yee: juan of the reasons we came up with the legacy business concept, man eel businesses were closing down for a variety of reasons. it was a reaction to trying to keep our older businesses continuing in the city, and i think we've had some success, and i think this restaurant itself is probably proof that it works. >> having the legacy business

experience has helped us a lot, too because it makes it good for us because we have been in business so long and stayed here so long. >> we get to know people by name, and they bring their children, so we get to know them, also. it's a great experience to get to know them. supervisor yee comes to eat at the restaurant, so he's a wonderful customer, and he's very loyal to us. >> president yee: my favorite dish is the chile rellenos. i almost never from the same things. my owner's son comes out, you want the same thing again? >> well, we are known for our mole, and we do three different

types of mole. in the beginning, i wasn't too familiar with the whole legacy program, but san francisco, being committed to preserve a lot of the old-time businesses, it's important to preserve a lot of the old time flavor of these neighborhoods, and in that capacity, it was great to be recognized by the city and county of san francisco. >> i've been here 40 years, and i hope it will be another 40

>> this is a huge catalyst for change. >> it will be over 530,000 gross square feet plus two levels of basement. >> now the departments are across so many locations it is hard for them to work together and collaborate and hard for the customers to figure out the different locations and hours of operation. >> one of the main drivers is a one stopper mitt center for -- permit center. >> special events. we are a one stop shop for those three things. >> this has many different uses throughout if years. >> in 1940s it was coca-cola and the flagship as part of the construction project we are retaining the clock tower.

the permit center is little working closely with the digital services team on how can we modernize and move away from the paper we use right now to move to a more digital world. >> the digital services team was created in 2017. it is 2.5 years. our job is to make it possible to get things done with the city online. >> one of the reasons permitting is so difficult in this city and county is really about the scale. we have 58 different department in the city and 18 of them involve permitting. >> we are expecting the residents to understand how the departments are structured to navigate through the permitting processes. it is difficult and we have heard that from many people we interviewed. our goal is you don't have to know the department. you are dealing with the city. >> now if you are trying to get construction or special events

permit you might go to 13 locations to get the permit. here we are taking 13 locations into one floor of one location which is a huge improvement for the customer and staff trying to work together to make it easy to comply with the rules. >> there are more than 300 permitting processes in the city. there is a huge to do list that we are possessing digital. the first project is allowing people to apply online for the a.d.u. it is an accessory dwelling unit, away for people to add extra living space to their home, to convert a garage or add something to the back of the house. it is a very complicated permit. you have to speak to different departments to get it approved. we are trying to consolidate to one easy to due process. some of the next ones are windows and roofing. those are high volume permits.

they are simple to issue. another one is restaurant permitting. while the overall volume is lower it is long and complicated business process. people struggle to open restaurants because the permitting process is hard to navigate. >> the city is going to roll out a digital curing system one that is being tested. >> when people arrive they canshay what they are here to. it helps them workout which cue they neat to be in. if they rant to run anker rapid she can do that. we say you are next in line make sure you are back ready for your appointment. >> we want it all-in-one location across the many departments involved. it is clear where customers go to play. >> on june 5, 2019 the ceremony was held to celebrate the

placement of the last beam on top of the structures. six months later construction is complete. >> we will be moving next summer. >> the flu building -- the new building will be building. it was designed with light in mind. employees will appreciate these amenities. >> solar panels on the roof, electric vehicle chargers in the basement levels, benefiting from gray watery use and secured bicycle parking for 300 bicycles. when you are on the higher floors of the building you might catch the tip of the golden gate bridge on a clear day and good view of soma. >> it is so exciting for the team. it is a fiscal manifestation what we are trying to do. it is allowing the different departments to come together to issue permits to the residents.

we hope people can digitally come to one website for permits. we are trying to make it digital so when they come into the center they have a high-quality interaction with experts to guide then rather than filling in forms. they will have good conversations with our staff. >> there are kids and families

ever were. it is really an extraordinary playground. it has got a little something for everyone. it is aesthetically billion. it is completely accessible. you can see how excited people are for this playground. it is very special. >> on opening day in the brand- new helen diller playground at north park, children can be seen swinging, gliding, swinging, exploring, digging, hanging, jumping, and even making drumming sounds. this major renovation was possible with the generous donation of more than $1.5 million from the mercer fund in honor of san francisco bay area philanthropist helen diller. together with the clean and safe neighborhood parks fund and the city's general fund. >> 4. 3. 2. 1. [applause]

>> the playground is broken into three general areas. one for the preschool set, another for older children, and a sand area designed for kids of all ages. unlike the old playground, the new one is accessible to people with disabilities. this brand-new playground has several unique and exciting features. two slides, including one 45- foot super slide with an elevation change of nearly 30 feet. climbing ropes and walls, including one made of granite. 88 suspension bridge. recycling, traditional swing, plus a therapeutics win for children with disabilities, and even a sand garden with chines and drums. >> it is a visionary $3.5 million world class playground in the heart of san francisco. this is just really a big, community win and a celebration for us all. >> to learn more about the helen

diller playground in dolores park, go to sfrecpark.org. >> hello, everyone. my name is london breed i'm the mayor of city and county of san francisco and i'm so excited to be here at anchor not just because they have a lot of beer enough to go around a dozen times with everybody that's here but more importantly, this is an incredible iconic company in san francisco. in fact they're a legacy business and have been around for generations. they've been great partners in our efforts to support businesses throughout san

francisco but in addition to that, they believe in the importance of being a part of the solution when it comes to climate change. we all know that here in the state of california, we are experiencing some very challenging times with the wildfires. on top of that, it's becoming increasingly difficult to fight the wildfires because we're also experiencing a drought. we have to think differently about the way we do things to protect the environment and protect and use water in different ways. in san francisco when i served on the board of supervisors before i was mayor, we pushed for legislation to allow for gray water, the water you wash your hands with to be reused and recycled when there is new construction in buildings. but we also know they are buildings that exist now that if provided additional resources,

could make very positive change and re-use in their water supply. here a lot of water is used. in fact the work being done here today is absolutely extraordinary. the company established the technology that would allow for anchor to take their whole infrastructure and make the types of changes that allow for the water that they use to clean the bottles and equipment and other things to actually be recycled water rather than water that could otherwise be used for drinking. this technology is really changing the way that we do business in the state of california and we're grateful for their support and the work that they did to develop this technology. and here in san francisco the san francisco public utilities commission have a grant program.

a grant program where we've already provided over $2 million to various companies to change their businesses so that it doesn't impact their business directly so they can accommodate technology like this to make adjustments and anchor received a $1 million grant to make such changes. we're grateful to be here today because when you think bit, what they're doing in just this location alone is anticipated to save over $20 million gallons of water. that's the equivalent of over 1300 residents in san francisco and san franciscans used 32 gallons of water a day which is one of the lowest anywhere and we believe in conservation and try to do our best but we also understand there's a need to change infrastructure and businesses and how we support

companies in san francisco to be innovative and creative in new developments that will help us to do exactly what we're doing here today. i'm grateful to be here and i know it's not after hours but i would hope that after we're done with this press conference, anchor may have some beer for us to sample so we can know what it tastes like. yes, especially because we have a special guest in the house and don't worry, he's not going to try to fight anyone here but edward norton, it's great to have you here in san francisco. bring that star power that we love but if you're using it for a purpose, that's going to protect the environment. it's going to help us move in a positive direction, san francisco with our new climate action goals and what we're doing around trying to be innovative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and do all the

things we know we need to do here in san francisco, we want to continue to be the model for the rest of the country. we know we can't do it alone but so many of the great innovative things we've done in the city to protect the environment have really led the way for others to follow and that's what we're going to see with this grant program. that's what we're going to see with the work in bringing forth this amazing technology to change things as we know it and with they want to introduce matt silver who is the chairman and president and ceo of this great technology and clearly it takes real smarts to develop something like this and we're so glad to have him here today. come on up, matthew. >> thank you, mayor breed. >> it's work in the water and waste water industry every day it's not every day you have an

event like this with mayor of the city and a famous actor. we appreciate you being here and appreciate you highlighting your support for sustainable infrastructure projects like we have here. and thanks everyone else for coming and being here. it's been a long time coming building this project and a couldn't be more excited than to celebrate it with you all. we're here to celebrate the plant and the impact it will have on the community here and the city but we're also here to celebrate the investment anchor is make and the city of san francisco is make in sustainable infrastructure right here in potrero hill. we also believe this can be a new model for how to do distributed industrial re-use across the country and that's something that's very much needed. industry is the second largest user of water globally and we can have a significant impact.

and for those who don't know kam came bryan and we look to make it reusable and sustain tabl and cost effective and we have the capacity to recover potable or near potable quality water and in some cases clean energy from processed water streams. and we'll charge by the gallon to treat it we cut footprint and co2 footprint and helping companies save money in the process.

anchor has a storied history and with the 20 year contract they have a contact for the future and we'll do a tour of the plant soon but i wanted to highlight a couple points. first, this is the largest commercial water reuse project in san francisco history and the mayor pointed out it's up to 20 million a year capacity. we have the ability to treat and recycle 100% up to 100% of anchors's processed water resulting in a drastic reduction in their water use and elimination of up to 92 metric tons of carbon dioxide a year. it's been implemented under a long term contract which we're thankful for. a final point before i hand it

off to our next speaker and sustainable infrastructure not easy. this project has had its ups and downs and we're really excited where it is today but it takes partnership. it takes partnership between the regulators and public sector and innovators and i'd like to thank all our partners that got us through to this point. anchor brewing, ceo michael tamiaka who i got to know and respect part of the project, scott peterson, we appreciate all working with us and trusting us on the project. the san francisco public utilities commission and a great advocate for the project and supporter throughout and i have to think the cambrian team,

richard ross in essential engineering, and others did the hard work of building this plan throughout covid and you should be proud of what you have here today. and i'm also thankful for those who supported us in the journey and springling capital and others and i'll hand it off to the next speaker but i'm honored he's one of the supporters among those. while edward doesn't really need an introduction, what some of you might not know is he's dedicated a significant amount of time, energy and investment to the environment and particularly water. as a valued board member at cambrian innovation he knows how to create and sustain an innovative company in the infrastructure markets and know he shares our vision with industry as an eco system and

with innovation and hard work we can develop solutions that support the environment, protect the environment while also saving communities and companies money. with that said, i'll introduce edward norton. >> hey, everybody, it's great to be here. i was listening to all of that and i was thinking that phrases like public-private partnership get tossed around a lot. it's a collateral at podiums but it's really true. i think this is a great example of what can happen when smart policy makers like mayor london and her public utility commission recognize that government can play a role in

not just facilitating but actually stimulating how society remakes itself and what the interplay is between business and public good. and i learned a lot about that and my , andy, when he was deputy secretary at the department of energy create the loan company that gave us companies like tesla now the highest cap auto company in the world and that was very much the product of government stimulus and i think it's phenomenal what anchor is doing and what the public utilities commission has capacitated and what matt and the cambrian team have created. the state of california doesn't

really have a water supply problem. the state of california has a water management problem. when you consider the dairy industry uses 50% of the water and doesn't recycle one drop of it, you know what we have to do in the state is use water as a renewable resource not as an infinite free we can assume we get it for free but can't presume industrial users can just throw it away after we use it. we have to demand as a city, state and country that the world we're living in period where you

have to pay attention and this should be a national standard what's going on right here. and here's the great thing, that it's not just leadership that's on display by the city of san francisco insisting and stimulating and saying there are symptoms that can now allow a company to do this. what we're seeing in terms of leadership from anchor is what we need to see. this is what real corporate leadership looks like. they look at the 30-year balance sheet and say, look, how are we going to improve margin and evolve our business so we anticipate resource shortfall, etcetera. and anchor not just doing the right thing but save money and

increase margins by figuring out a way without having to purchase a system like this, they can lower their actual operating costs while secure tieing their water stream. this is brilliant corporate leadership to increase the value of this company and basically what i see going on here is really a whole bunch of different partners throwing the gloves down. it's a challenge to other companies to do as well as anchor is doing. it's a challenge to other cities and the whole state of california to replicate this model and insist that water be wisely recycled as a policy mandate and what's really exciting to me as a board member of cambrian and we need ways to create a true win-win where a new american technological company makes a great business

for itself, creates jobs while lowering, while improving the business model of its constituent clients. when they say a service industry, that's a true service. if one business is helping another business do better and at the same time improving the underlying water security of the entire state of california, that's what we need to be doing. that's what we need to be doing. so i think it's appear. we talk about drought and fires and these things. we don't not have enough water. we have enough water we just use it stupidly. we can't afford to waste what we have. now is the time. the last year in the state should have brought home to everybody that we can't afford to waste water and tre truth is yes it's great for people to think of watering their lawn but residential use of water is not the problem. it's in the massive waste in

industrial use of water and what anchor and san francisco are doing here is what the state of california should be talking about with central valley livestock agriculture as well because they should be building systems like this in the central valley and where we'll see change to the profile of the crisis we're manufacturing by ourselves by throwing away water for and i've been a u.n. ambassador over a decade and water is a pillar problem. water affects human health and affects bio diversity and will end up affecting our air quality because it's how we fight fires in the state. we have to solve the water

problem in the state of california and this is how we get it done and congratulations to ever one of you involved because it's more than a brewery coming up with a cool water system. it's really the solution we need to a massive problem in the united states. i also get to introduce someone who i think in industry what i would call alchemy and being a brew master at a major brewery to me is like being an alchemist. you're literally taking stuff and turning it into gold we drink. tom has been with anchor 37 years. he's been the brew master about two years. he's from the potrero hill area. a true local and a master at his craft and so he's going get to talk to us about what this means for his magic making in the tanks.

>> thank you for that introduction. thank you for that statement. i that was very powerful. today's an incredible milestone for our team at anchor brewing as we celebrate our commitment to our hometown of san francisco through the initiative with the san francisco p.u.c. and cambrian innovation. anchor turned 125 years this year and we couldn't be more proud to partner with organizations that allow our brewery to reduce our water usage and overall carbon footprint. i'm born and raised in san francisco, i grew up in this neighborhood on potrero hill and been with anchor 37 years. i started on the packaging line when i was 21 and touched every corner of this brewery. i even served as i tour guide at

one time. it's definitely inspiring for me to see this partnership come to life and a testament to anchor brewing and san francisco's commitment to not only the future of our brewery but our surrounding community. on behalf of the entire anchor team, thank you for supporting and contributing to the enduring legacy of our brand in san francisco. thank you. >> i'm going to introduce our next speaker, a quick story first talking about the nature of the partnership. as with any innovative partnership it hit some snags along the way and every time we hit them the san francisco public utilities commission worked directly with anchor and cambrianne and rolled up their

sleeves and broke down barrier and that's innovation from a regulatory perspective and cambrian is the standards here and speaks to the values and quality of the people at the sfpuc and pleased to introduce the commission president. i will say along with being the commission president, she's the director of urban water policy with stanford university's water in the west program doing research on data principles to study human and policy dimensions of the urban water and hydro logic systems and a real expert on water management.

>> thank you. it's a hard act to follow but i'm not president of the commission. i'm vice president of the commission and i just got appointed to that position so i am truly delighted to be here and as someone who has spent my entire career looking at how to build water solution are sustainable and resilient and trying to come up with different valuable policies that can reach this outcome, i'm really honored and excited to be in this position. i have followed this effort that has been put together by sfpuc for years and it's a visionary effort. so we all know that climate change is impacting our water supplies and infrastructure and obviously the future is a little bit uncertain when you're thinking about all these impacts. so unless we really look back and see how we can innovate and

change the way we use water, we can't really move forward and i think this project is a great example of how we use recycling at any scale should be at the table and what we see here right now. by matching alternate water resources with the right end use such as what we're seeing here and using the waters in the tanks to try to reuse them, we can actually sort of save our precious water supplies and drinking water supplies and unlock the potential for resilient and sustainable water future and also equitable water future which we all need to pay attention to. this kind of project is why sfpuc launched the water reuse program for the breweries in 2013. it requires a real vision and leadership and i can say this not attributing to myself but it

requires real leadership and vision for a utility to take this on because it was not easy and an appreciated to be part of this group. typically in a brewery you may not know they use four to seven gallons of water to produce about a gallon of beer. that extra four to six gallons of water can be reused for different purposes and what we're trying to do here. depending on how much water is reused, san francisco public utilities commission has been trying to provide $250,000 to $1 million to support these kinds of projects which i think is important. that is another reason why sfpuc has always been a leader in the re-use system. we were the first city to launch such requirements is something we started the first

municipality in the nation to require this for new and large development and now we have made that strengthen what we have and make it broader to include more buildings and businesses as part of that. along with water reuse we have other water recycling projects going on. those initiatives include our water recycling project that will provide about 2 million gallons a day for golden gate park and presidio and lincoln park and irrigation water and some of the golf courses as well will be using some of that water. san francisco will always be a leader in conservation. as you heard we're using about 40 gallons per person per day which is quite low for the day.

which is low and denmark is using 22 gallons and i say do not water your lawns with precious water and while we're doing re-use an recycling, it's great that we are here and i'm grateful for the team that's been trying to work hard to make water conservation efficiency re-use recycling and embrace it and make it a reality. with all the television cameras here today, this is an opportunity to remind everybody and all the breweries out there, please, please, reach out to us, embrace the solutions and technologies and let us work together and save water. this is the first time we are celebrating a project of this kind in san francisco but i really hope it's not last and thank you again for all of you to be here and i think we are going to do some ribbon cutting. perfect. thank you, everyone.

>> okay. are we ready? five, four, three, two, one. adjourned. >> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their shop & dine in the 49 with within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so where will you shop & dine in

the 49 my name is jim woods i'm the founder of woods beer company and the proprietor of woods copy k open 2 henry adams what makes us unique is that we're reintegrated brooeg the beer and serving that cross the table people are sitting next to the xurpz drinking alongside we're having a lot of ingredient that get there's a lot to do the district of retail shop having that really close connection with the consumer allows us to do exciting things we decided to come to treasure island because we saw it as an amazing opportunity can't be beat the views and real estate that great county starting to develop on treasure island like minded business owners with last week products and want to get on the ground floor a no-brainer for us when you you, you buying

local goods made locally our supporting small business those are not created an, an sprinkle scale with all the machines and one person procreating them people are making them by hand as a result more interesting and can't get that of minor or anywhere else and san francisco a hot bed for local manufacturing in support that is what keeps your city vibrant we'll make a compelling place to live and visit i think that local business is the lifeblood of san francisco and a vibrant community

>> hearing for thursday, october 28 2021 and those meetings require everyone's attention andpatience . if youare not speaking, please commute your microphone . sfgov tv is streaming mishearing live and we will receivecomment on each item on today's agenda . comments are available by calling 1-415-655-0001 and entering access code 2486 151 4664. when we reach the item you are interested in speaking to , please press star 3 to be added to the queue. when you hear your linehas been unmuted that is your cue to begin speaking . each