at that time back in 2018, but was very diligent. and prior to the removal hearing june july and august of 2018 they inspected all the trees. so once a month for 33 months. except for the last month, august 2018. i think it's ironic but once that case ran its course and the library withdrew itsrequest to remove trees in june 2020 , no inspections were made. no furtherinspections were made . these were put to the public use of 19 trees that are going to fallover and damaged people

or property . but once the library gave up, they didn't inspect the trees again and they haven't until this one fell down in may 2021. the decision on this one tree failure was to remove all the trees . next slide . so in the buff it says once this tree fell off inspected all the other trees. so at that timethere were 19 trees minus one that fell . and we went into the database and discovered they didn't inspect all the trees. they inspected11 out of 18 . so we have a little fault in the inspection area.

i've also looked in the database hundreds of times to see the word inspect and wondered what thatmeant . is it a drive-by to see if the tree is still standing ? do theylook at the tree ? there are no noteson why they wrote that down . let's see, next slide please. this is from the actual tree database and it shows the one with the red line around it is the one that failed recently. you'll see towards the bottom only to trees on high street were inspected. when they say they inspected all the other trees tosee if they were safe they did not do that . at leastaccording to the official record . next slide please. so dpw said okay, this tree is down, we better get rid of all these trees. so arborist legate noted by dpw

this was premature and lacking in basic observations in data. that's a pretty harsh thing to say to an arborist who ispaid to observe and use data . next slide please. let's see. most of the complaints that buff post had to do with the trunks of the trees and unfortunately you can see here the trunk of the tree is burie under papers . little bricks that fell on the tree well. leggett said you can't condemn a tree without looking at. it's like if you have a problem with your foot and you go to the doctor and he gives you a diagnosis and you take off you shoes, what kind of diagnosis is that ?this is comparable. we can't see the place where they're objecting to the tree.

there's a bunch of terms like no ground layer, large diamond is not an indication, reverse taper, standing water is an issue. so basically the tree inspection wasfaulty . they didn't inspect all the trees and pretty much just sent up to flair and said we've got to get rid of all these trees so that concludes my remarks at this point. >> clerk: we will now move on to the bureau of urban forestry. >> thank you commissioners and president hondaand appellants . i think we're getting there in terms of what was done and said at the hearing back in 2018. it's definitely a lot of information to recover.

out of respect for all the appellants it might require all 35 minutes whatever it takes. i'm going to go ahead and share my screen. so we're going to get into the details we've been talking about but i want to step back for a moment for those commissioners that may not hav used this live a couple of years ago . it's just going to be a couple of minutes about ficus trees but this is a ficus tree on th left in this image . ficus trees were not prone to enhance or maintain sound structure decades and years ago. we've seen a lot of ficus failures in the last 10 years.

so to address these ficus failures, we wanted to understand should there be a lessening and how strict and tight we are in our decision-making process when we approve a tree for removal we've always had high standards not to remove trees that are relatively healthy so you'll hear us talk about this term with code dominant stands, to stands of approximately equal size and the image on the left is certainly worse than image on the right but even with a wide angle of attachment says into stems of equal diameter and make them look more prone to fail.this is what we're seeing citywide and this is before streettree sf . this is where two thirds of street trees were the responsibility to maintain by the property owners in 2014 the director created in order for

tree removal criteria for ficu trees . this is a couple of years before the passage of street tree sf. there was quite a bit of media coverage. we have a large number of removals over a traynor of years and are concerned with ficus trees is their branching attachments. move forward another year or two and in 2017 the city became responsible for maintaining all the street trees so over the last several years as we go through systematically and strategically to evaluate all the street trees in san francisco we visit he blocks that are designated through our

... just our branchmanager, our database manager . we look at where we have the most trees and higher areas of volume and in the busiestareas of the city .he's on the trees we've beenprioritizing for maintenance . some of that maintenance efforts have come before you in the form of the old tree removal. in particular phase value among many others . you have information on our website about our concern about ficus trees . two years ago in 2018 the library submitted a permit application to remove all 19 ficus trees adjacent to the property at 100 larkin street and spend time going through the last couple of years very quickly.we have a lot of information we want to cover. the library sought placement of

the trees in 2018 and again there was quite a process working with the appellants. i'm glad that the conversation has maintained a positive note this evening becausethere really was a lot accomplished both before the check in with board of appeals and after . and in early 2020 the item was going to be continued so i even have in my own brief and update at the february 2020 where we were but at that point in time we were still the proposal was still a compromise where we were still seeking removal of the trees with 11 remain. so we had not, that's one important detail. due to the impact from the pandemic the san francisco public library had to scale backinitial mitigation . there were several mitigations they were clearly in charge of. they were going to occur with their funds and on their property . the application to remove those trees was withdrawn in june

2020. once the application was drawn for public works to pursue removal of any ficus trees for the library and entirely new process need to have been initiated. in 2020 public works was working with other appellants from hayes valley and mission guarding the proposed removal of ficus trees and one of the asks from the appellant i gratefully was slowing things down. at this point we had just to remember it seems crazy but part of this is in the tenderloin. the playgrounds in the city were closed so as very and others were asking could we not remove trees until the parks areback open ? we have trinity plaza apartments. can we wait until those trees are planted. there was a lot of emphasis on slowing the process down so

tonight when i hear that we're speeding it up i want to gently and with great and other respect say there's been a slowdown. there has been a slowdown. it wasunfortunate that the library withthrough the permit application but at that point in timealthough it would have been ideal to continue the conversation , it didn't . everyone was in the depths of the pandemic . we are following conditions for removal of ficus with a tremendous amount of citizen involvement. then technically speaking where not scheduled to prune the ficus trees until a future maintenance cycle and in april of may prior to the failure near the entrance we were actively discussing the process for public works to prune the trees at the main library and had proactively ahead of what the schedule dictatedbecause it was time to prune the trees . after the ficus failed on may

29 the bureau had to reassess our ownapproach to the ficus trees . that point there was no clear-cut of the trees. of all the trees we look at there was one ficus tree on the corner of hyde closest to grow that we felt should be removed on an emergency basis so of 18 trees the quote unquote unilateral decisionto remove the trees, we removed one tree on an emergency basis . in may of this year we had a ficus tree fail from the root crown. this was a near miss the public works employee seated in the vehicle at the timetaking a break . that was definitely unfortunate. so prior to 2021 to reduce the number of ficus trees we removed that the main library public works was willing to monitor the issue so the root crown of ficus areas were a couple species in the lower

crown area but these concerns were very well documented in our conversations with the appellants and also in our resulting decision. the root crown lower trunk failure at the main entrance was unfortunate but it also confirmed the validity of our original concernsabout the structural integrity of the ficus trees at the main library . we did post the remaining tree , 17 trees for removal and we hada hearing in july of this year . this is the tree posted for a 24 hour removal notice and it's important to cover a lot of the information from this year because one of the appellants really didn't have a lot of questions about what were the activities this year so i'll move through themquickly but want to address those concerns in her brief . this was the tree posted for emergency removal and regarding the assessment of the trees

these trees were look at and evaluated closely not just by myself but by a tree crew. by urban forestryinspectors, multiple inspectors . our assistanceintended . this was an all hands on deck we need to understand what to do here. we had the library emailing us saying you all hada new this . we did too. we need you toevaluate those trees . positive feedback from mister carnes. you are not able to document every inspection that we've made on these trees but i personally have been out here probably at least once a month looking at these trees . regarding, this is just a slide showing how many people evaluated these trees even though it's not documented in the tree database. there are a lot of conversations about the

management of trees and it won't always necessarily in that database. best management, absolutely. but i want to ensure everybody these needs are closely evaluated. in september wedid lose another tree . this is on the high street. we had a truck pull up and damaged this branch. yanks a large stem free and the remaining section of the tree with the cracks present was unstable and had to be removed on an emergency basis. this is an image of our tree group removing it on an emergency basis. while on-site our tree crew pruned theremaining trees to improve clearance over hyde street i just wanted to point that out . again 2021 this year the library had removed and withdrawn their permit application . we had no basis on which to

pursue removal at that point in time. it's literally like starting over and i don't want touse the phrase pulling the rug out . but that's not a permit or all that work is not something that's actionable if we want to moveforward on removal . that said , our street tree sf guide to when we would be out therenext , to me i saw the cooling-off traynor but there was no consciousdecision not to engage . the communication didn't occur. but i do want to talkabout again in 2018 we were talking loud and clear about our concerns about the root grounds and potential failure .that said we didn't have any evidence or failures to that point in time. at that point in time we were willing to scale back the

number of removals which we will get to. the root crown of a tree is all like the central nervoussystem of the tree . picture the base of your neck, where your head joins your spinal column. it wants to be in the open air with no soil and no water pressing against that. this is information just taken directly off our resulting decisions from 2018 that highlighted our concern about the lack of trunk taper, calling a reverse trunk taper. i even have it here that we acknowledged as mister leggett does that the trees are planted below grade . that's still a form of reverse taper when it's coming out from the ground and it's literally in reverse taper, narrow when it comes out of the ground and gettinglarger but still considered a reverse taper .

look at these two images, very similar. the tree on the left is the one that failed in front of the entrance to thelibrary . verysimilar conditions . these are representative of other basins adjacent to the library sitting in water . the trees were planted in 1996 so essentially sitting in wate for 25 or so years . not a good thing for a street tree. i'm going to have to move through what i have next, the individual trees with our photos of the trees. we evaluated these trees multiple timeslooking at them . there's no taper visible. when wind impacts these trees it impacts the tree, the strongest in the lower trunk there's no doubt about that . so one of the responses i want to be clear about is why would

we, the question is why did we not remove papers to evaluate what's going onbelow . that would not do undo 25 years of having the rootgrounds very . just because your opening back up to the air.it does not meanthe damage is still there . one of the concerns we have that we've discussed for the library appellants is that if as mister leggett proposed by email this week that we excavate and put a great over these openings, there's no way for the library to clean out what ends up falling down within the weather is inchesor a flex in-depth . there's no wayfor them to clean that out . and so these will still inevitably be filled with water each day when the sidewalk is the area just going through and showing the co-dominance stems

with included bark.again that each of these trees hasbeen evaluated again and again . noting the conditions are concerned about stem failure aboveground . now our concern, our new concernabout roof failures belowground . this again is the tree that was removed on an emergency basis back after the tree that failed aroundthe corner . so we have detailed images of all this. we disagree with mister legates assessment that we are negligent in not removing these papers the library will talk about their own maintenance concerns . they are not going to be able to maintain a pace basin is recessed here because of the way that they need to clear out thearea of the sidewalk . theyneed to wash , be able to wash it out even if we do that are still having those trees sit instanding water every day .

i'll wrap up these individual assessments again, on the 29th when this tree failed it's not even clear. i wish our tree crew had cut remnants so we could look at was there dk present . but there may not be any decay present that's how weak the lower front of these trees our when they're hit withstrong winds . and yes they all survived the storm last week but it doesn't mean that the storm coming in at one degree difference is going to impact them differently. i want to point out on this day it's a saturday went failed was with no outstanding wins to note. that's important to note. again our employee okay. she cannot. this is an image ofthe tree that failed . i do want to move on to our planting plan.

and that's just about wraps it up. this is just a close-up of the kind of damage that's being done to the root crown and removing those papers is not going to reverse that damage unfortunately and they're going to continue to sit in water. regarding the replacement plan i think again, i'm going to respectfully disagree that we had committed to not removing any trees. we had settled on removing eight and we were finalizing what phase meant. exactly what the library and public works. strongly we should remove those a tree soon. now regarding replacement species it was something that was notfinalized . our recommendation was to replace with reference species like red maple for london plane trees and sit and have their feet wet every day of the year

withoutdeveloping these routes crown issues. baby planted at the proper depth . our goal is to remove and replace these trees within six months . the public library is committed to watering the trees. we are committed to using the same amount of protection for these trees for 10 foot tall protective screens. close communication with the library should they see any maintenance issues we will restate if necessary and structural pruning would be done to make sure these new trees don't have the facts like the ficus too. regarding replacement tree spacing at our hearing in 2018 there are three trees in the center of this image. 334 and five which do not meet current planting guidelines but the proposal is to remove these trees without easily replanting them in these locations because we need greater clearances between the basins and the

brush shelter and more clearance from the streetlight . someoverall look at the replacement tree numbers . where talking about the removal of the seven remaining ficus. there were a total of nine and plant six replacement trees on that site whichis maxing what can be planted following are guidelines . the removal of nine trees on growth there were a total of 10 before. planting 10 pleasantries on grove so overall going back to 2018 the overall impact is removal of 19 trees replacing with 18 because of the existing site constraints and adjacent to the library. we do ask that the final species selectionbe left to the bureau of urban forestry but we have enjoyed robust conversation with the appellants . they would prefer versus what publicworks at the library would prefer are deciduous trees . we are still maximizing the size benefits red mapleand

lemon plant trees are considered large so we still are capturing those benefits . this is another example of ultimately the bureau of urban forestry needs to reserve the right on making the final pcs decision. just in the last few weeks another layer of review has come up through the preservation team with the planning department to is checking in with public works citywide in certain areas to just say they want to make sure when we replaced trees if there is a historic preservation in mind that we are bearing that in mind so we reached out to them to say we have a hearing and i need to is feedback asap. is still in conversation with them. but there are, there's a cultural landscape report for this block 354 and the guidance is to replace species that would be in keeping with the

civic center area. so we're going to continue to work with the senior historic preservation contact to really just get under the hood and understand those red maple, is that going to be in line. we believe it will be noted that the ficus trees are here on the bottom left of the image. regarding tree basin construction the appellants who i again appreciate all the advocacyand work that we jointly put in . they asked involve a landscape architect to review basin construction sothis ties into replanting . we really jointly determined that sometimes things can be overengineered. wedon't need to do a lot of engineering here . we need toplant the tree at or above grade remove the papers .and replant species at or slightly above grade with backfill of

soil. use organic mulch to cover the tree basin. the backfilling of the tree basins with decomposed granite would only occur after the trees had been established and no longer require supplemental watering that would be approximately three years. this is what we mean when we talk about planting a tree at or slightly above grade to make surewe don't have ruth krauss that are sitting in additional soil or sitting in water every day so the root crown are replanted in line with the top level of sidewalk . this is an approximation of what 24 inch box size trees look like . these are red maples on the right and i believethat's politeness on the left . they're showing examples of that. there are two opportunities to replant additionaltrees on growth . they were paid years ago by th library and we're going to open those backup .

big picture, san francisco public works we have a goal of ensuring safe lean and green infrastructure andpublic rights-of-way. we have street treat sf . >>

>> -- and that both parties are going to have to give, so the give was we would retain 11 ficus. retain 11, remove eight. that was a key part of the compromise. now there was some discussion about what phased would mean, and the library was committed to that. but that was the agreement. remaining eight and retaining 11. we should have reached out before initiating the posting of those 30 trees. i had to hand things over to others. as you can see, it's

unfortunate that we're here. may 29, we had a close call. we were willing to live with those 11 ficus. we were willing to say, we see those record of roof crowns, but there's no failure. let's work with the public and keep those trees, and then, we had the failure outside the entrance. that was a very close call, and unfortunately, at public works, although it's not popular, we need to say that the ficus trees need to be removed, they need to be replaced, of course. there's a lot that's gone on in 2021, but we're documenting everything that's going on, and that's why i want to take the time to address each of miss

boler's requests this year. there were certain things that the library was committing to that public works could not commit to, and roberto lombardi reached out to say, i'm sorry, but the library needs to focus on core business, and we had not finalized all of our near agreements, but that's the details as i went through them. and again, i do want to assure the commissioners and the public that we're evaluating these trees very, very carefully. roy and i have the same credentials. you know, i've been a proctor

for the certified arborist exam. we don't need to list all of our professional qualifications, but i do want to assure the public that if we thought there was information to glean by removing the pavers and reviewing the roots of those trees, that would have been done. it's been considered, as well as putting a grate over the trees and getting rid of all that soil. the amount of debris that they're dealing with on a daily basis is not pleasant to talk about, but it can't be recessed below ground. these trees, even if you do that, they're still going to be sitting in water. we appreciate your patience.

we're glad no one got hurt, but now that that tree has failed, we're looking at the removing ficus, and for trees that are just 25 years old, they've got competing stems, failing leaders, and now we have a confirmed issue with all the root crowns. so that's where we are today. we're asking that the board approve public works approving the remaining 16 trees with replacement trees, but big picture going back, it's ultimately replacement of 19.

the request for a six-month turnaround is the library was committing to six months physically on-site. we are not physically on-site. we would strive for three but ultimately want a buffer of six. we are immediately meeting our commitments to hayes valley and we're meeting our commitments to 24 street, and you would immediately hear from them if we're not, so that's a little bit of an olive branch to demonstrate our commitment. i'll wrap that up. >> clerk: thank you. we have a question from president honda and a question from vice president swig. >> president honda: welcome

back. since i've been back, we've heard more tree hearings. i myself have witnessed a failure of a ficus, and now, that's why we're here, and it seems it's a reason we want to get rid of all the trees above. you know, my grandmother lived in the tenderloin for 40 years. there is no -- there's no trees. i have a business located in the tenderloin. i see lots of empty tree basins and trees that are snapped in half. over the nine years, i heard about this street plan. i seen it as it's matured, and as you said, you know, you're agreeing with the plan, but yet, performing this is a huge part of everything.

and even though you guys are working to get this done every year, it falls less and less and it falls further in the hole in my opinion. and, you know, like i said, i look at ficus' all the time, and when i look at them, i see most of them with branches that are codependent and leading, and so does that mean that we take out all the ficus'? as commissioner fung says, that's not his favorite tree, but does that mean we should remove all of them? that's what was planted in the 70s and 80s, so it's very challenging. you say we had all this compromise, but yet, we're coming back to the table two years later, no, let's forget

the compromise and just do the whole thing. i would like to see something other than just removal of all the trees because i am not on board with that at all. vice president swig? >> commissioner swig: hopefully i'll do a better job of asking questions, but i'll be just as direct. welcome back, mr. buck, and welcome to the pit again for the fight.

you have 19 trees, you're replacing 18. that's 5%. that's another loss of trees in san francisco, correct? >> correct. >> commissioner swig: you have a plan that you got almost all the way there in february of 20, and now -- and there was some details related to the choice of trees and some other, i would consider, minor details in that you got pretty much into the aforementioned red zone, pretty close, and are you just going to disregard that hard work and throw that plan away just because now you want to do a shave and a haircut? >> no. i mean, again, there were very

concrete requests that were accommodated. literally, sidewalks were closed in the tenderloin and there were requests to slow down. some of that happened directly, some of that happened indirectly. the library withdraws their removal application -- >> commissioner swig: but it doesn't matter if it's the library. let's not going into semantics, and let's not hide behind the skirts another -- that's not meant to be sexist. let's not hide behind another department and use the library to tear down trees in a willy

nilly fashion. you had a plan, and forget all the rest of the stuff in the tenderloin. stay focused on the trees that we discussed on grove street. stay focused on the trees that we discussed on hyde street. can you implement that plan on those trees as was discussed by the public? >> not at this time. >> commissioner swig: why not? >> everyone saw the photo of the entrance to the library. >> commissioner swig: that's a great one. >> so commissioner, what i'm saying is the compromise was retaining 11 trees, removing eight.

we didn't remove trees, but the compromise was to hold off and not -- not remove all the trees. we've got it down to eight that we felt were critical, but since that time and during that delay, we had a pretty notable failure in an area that's heavily documented by public works. i mean, i want to pull those trees up to the ground level and undo the damage done, but we can't ignore the liability. >> commissioner swig: is there a process -- let me ask you another question. there's 68 -- 2.5 years ago, there were 68 empty tree basins in north beach. how many of those 68 tree basins, after hearing from this commission, especially myself on multiple times, about those 68 tree basins, how many trees have been planted in those 68 tree basins? >> we made those all happen.

>> commissioner swig: they all got done? >> they all got planted, and there's any attrition, we need to replant those. but absolutely, north beach has us on speed dial. we absolutely delivered on north beach. now could there have been a couple that are missing in the last few months? sure, but we are absolutely looking at other areas to plant in north beach. >> commissioner swig: and is there a plan that goes -- what i'm hearing is shave and a haircut, which means we're going to shave all 19 of those trees down and replant them. is there another plan that's not as radical that you can identify so that not 19 trees are given a haircut and are not

suddenly bald and then waiting for 18 trees to be planted. can it be done in a method that enables that street, both streets not to be scarred and bald for a period of time waiting for trees to be replanted? >> that was the plan that was nearly agreed upon, and then, we had the tree fail. >> commissioner swig: okay. >> and so that changed the narrative. i mean, that definitely changed the narrative adjacent to the library. >> commissioner swig: but if -- but [indiscernible] according to mr. leggett, i believe, you're going for the shave and a haircut situation, where, in fact, although there may be trees that are damaged or in

distress, there are some trees that are not damaged and not in distress, and so -- i'm not saying that -- i'm not saying that the whole process shouldn't be done, but why should the whole bag of eggs be thrown out into the garbage can when there are four eggs -- assuming the rest of the basket's going to get rot, but you throw out the four eggs first because they stink. is there a process by which this can occur so this whole expanse of street front is not suddenly barren? >> commissioner, i hear your

concerns, but it's which tree would fail next? they're all exhibiting the characteristics of the one that failed. the trees are all relatively similar size. there's only a couple on grove that you might call them a little bit smaller. but there's -- there's -- no. i mean, we're not seeing -- if there's an olive branch here, we would be the first to offer it. but unfortunately, we're not seeing it, and that's why we had literally everyone, including the tree crew, and our superintendent and our assistant superintendent, what are the options here? the first one is one emergency removal. we didn't do that to the rest of them because we knew we needed to have that conversation again, but we're not prepared at this time to propose a phased approach because we don't have anything to base it on that would be a

rationale that would hold up under scrutiny. >> commissioner swig: thank you for that answer, and i'm going to ask in rebuttal -- and if you don't have the time to do it, i will ask you to have time to do it, and all the appellants, an alternative plan that, in my words, a shave and a haircut, all trees go down, leaving this street bare, waiting for d.p.w. to access and plant the replacement trees. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. commissioner lopez has a question, i believe. you're on mute. commissioner lopez? >> commissioner lopez: thanks. yeah, mr. buck, just one question, and i think the appellants, from my

perspective, did a good job kind of broadening the aperture a little bit and placing this question in the context of, you know, inadequate tree planting across the city, in particular, certain parts of the city like the tenderloin that don't have the coverage that we would like. you know, can you just weigh-in on that question, maybe? i think it's clear to me, you know, your points with respect to where did this fit with the department's planting and plan long-term? >> sure, commissioner. without a doubt, in an ideal

world, we would plant all empty basins, meaning trees that have been removed that have not been planted yet, and then just plant the rest of the city, plan it all out and win the trust of the public. that is literally the day -- hopefully it's not our grand kids, but someday, someone will call the city because there's no tree -- because someone will call the city and say, there's no tree in front of a home, and we'll say, there's no tree because there's underground utilities in front of that home. just like every other city department, we have to -- we have to compete with funds, and so it's not a lack of will, you

know? we want to plant these trees. we want to plant in areas that are undisturbed. a nearly 20-year resident down the street from the case that was before us, we know where we need to plant. we know that. the tenderloin -- so just let me bring it back again to this site. we know the tenderloin doesn't have a lot of trees. there are challenges to tree planting in the tenderloin. there's a lot of sidewalk basins. we planted a couple of years ago when the global accord was in san francisco. the international global accords, we did a planting that morning. it was one of the official concurrent events. you know, we focused on the tenderloin. we weren't planting in-fill in an area that already has a lot of trees, so the challenge for us is that we're aware of the situation. unfortunately, we're given the

urban forest right now to manage, and we don't get to make our decisions to, like, do the easy stuff first and avoid the tough trees. i would be love -- it would be great to not walk down 24 street, but guess what? we have to go look at the trees on 24 street. we have failures, so i -- i guess what i want to assure you, mr. klipp, the first appellant i spoke to this even, is an incredible advocate for the urban forest. he's chipping away, and understandably, like, why is the city removing trees when they know they need to plant more? we know we need to plant more trees. a little bit general, but we have specifics. we have a database of all the

potential planning sites. we have a plan, and as that continues to get increased funding, we're going to continue to plant in the areas that need the most trees, so i just want to ensure everyone, yourself and the public included, that that is what is happening, and, you know, we have informational items all the time. we're currently before the board of supervisors reporting out on what those numbers are, so i just want to assure everyone that we're -- there is progress. it's not always backwards action, so, you know, maybe another evening i need to bring a little bit of that information so the public understands we are doing tree planting. thank you. >> clerk: okay. we have a question from commissioner chang.

>> commissioner chang: i think that the concern by the appellants is also very clear. there's waning canopy and there's a very strong desire to increase the canopy and increase the number of trees in the city. i personally -- while it's sad to say, i personally believe that the tree removal permits were properly issued, but i guess to address the concerns of the public, it doesn't seem

there's a timeline that can be given. while there seems to be good intentions behind the plan that was discussed a couple years ago now, things changed and circumstances required the removal of trees that were not essentially planned. is there some level of assurance or some check in or something that we can provide to the appellant to help restore their faith besides we understand, and i also want to say that i understand you're being put in a tough position right now because there are a lot of circumstances that are outside of your control, but i think that's what the appellants would probably want to hear. >> i do think there is a mechanism, and i, you know, again, unfortunate events all-around. i just feel like if i had been around for the last half of the year, perhaps those

conversations could have occurred so that we could avoid an appeal or at least have a little bit more of a consensus that either we are -- we've got an agreement and we're essentially settles and/or come to you and say -- settled and/or come to you and say, we've got 95% but neither of us can best of your knowledge on a couple of issues. that absolutely would be ideal. i wish we were here with better circumstances and, you know, i returned two weeks ago and hoped that things had been resolved, and they had not, and then, i had to start catching myself up on where things were. not a great answer, but i do

think we're in touch with the appellants on a regular basis on a number of different cases. it's -- you know, it's happening. [please stand by]

shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their shopping and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco. by supporting local services within our neighborhoods, we help san francisco remain unique, successful, and vibrant. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> my name is ray behr. i am the owner of chief plus. it's a destination specialty foods store, and it's also a corner grocery store, as well. we call it cheese plus because there's a lot of additions in addition to cheese here. from fresh flowers, to wine, past a, chocolate, our dining area and espresso bar.

you can have a casual meeting if you want to. it's a real community gathering place. what makes little polk unique, i think, first of all, it's a great pedestrian street. there's people out and about all day, meeting this neighbor and coming out and supporting the businesses. the businesses here are almost all exclusively independent owned small businesses. it harkens back to supporting local. polk street doesn't look like anywhere u.s.a. it has its own businesses and personality. we have clothing stores to gallerys, to personal service stores, where you can get your hsus repaired, luggage repaired. there's a music studio across the street. it's raily a diverse and unique offering on this really great street. i think san franciscans should

shop local as much as they can because they can discover things that they may not be familiar with. again, the marketplace is changing, and, you know, you look at a screen, and you click a mouse, and you order something, and it shows up, but to have a tangible experience, to be able to come in to taste things, to see things, to smell things, all those things, it's very important that you do so.

>> after my fire in my apartment and losing everything, the red cross gave us a list of agencies in the city to reach out to and i signed up for the below-market rate program. i got my certificate and started applying and won the housing lottery. [♪♪♪] >> the current lottery program began in 2016. but there have been lot rows that have happened for affordable housing in the city for much longer than that. it was -- there was no standard practice. for non-profit organizations that were providing affordable housing with low in the city, they all did their lotteries on their own. private developers that include in their buildings affordable

units, those are the city we've been monitoring for some time since 1992. we did it with something like this. where people were given circus tickets. we game into 291st century in 2016 and started doing electronic lotteries. at the same time, we started electronic applications systems. called dalia. the lottery is completely free. you can apply two ways. you can submit a paper application, which you can download from the listing itself. if you apply online, it will take five minutes. you can make it easier creating an account. to get to dalia, you log on to housing.sfgov.org. >> i have lived in san francisco for almost 42 years.

i was born here in the hayes valley. >> i applied for the san francisco affordable housing lottery three times. >> since 2016, we've had about 265 electronic lotteries and almost 2,000 people have got their home through the lottery system. if you go into the listing, you can actually just press lottery results and you put in your lottery number and it will tell you exactly how you ranked. >> for some people, signing up for it was going to be a challenge. there is a digital divide here and especially when you are trying to help low and very low income people. so we began providing digital assistance for folks to go in and get help. >> along with the income and the residency requirements, we also

required someone who is trying to buy the home to be a first time home buyer and there's also an educational component that consists of an orientation that they need to attend, a first-time home buyer workshop and a one-on-one counseling session with the housing councilor. >> sometimes we have to go through 10 applicants before they shouldn't be discouraged if they have a low lottery number. they still might get a value for an available, affordable housing unit. >> we have a variety of lottery programs. the four that you will most often see are what we call c.o.p., the certificate of preference program, the dthp which is the displaced penance housing preference program. the neighborhood resident housing program and the live worth preference.

>> i moved in my new home february 25th and 2019. the neighborhood preference program really helped me achieve that goal and that dream was with eventually wind up staying in san francisco. >> the next steps, after finding out how well you did in the lottery and especially if you ranked really well you will be contacted by the leasing agent. you have to submit those document and income and asset qualify and you have to pass the credit and rental screening and the background and when you qualify for the unit, you can chose the unit and hopefully sign that lease. all city sponsored affordable housing comes through the system and has an electronic lottery. every week there's a listing on dalia. something that people can apply for. >> it's a bit hard to predict how long it will take for

someone to be able to move into a unit. let's say the lottery has happened. several factors go into that and mainly how many units are in the project, right. and how well you ranked and what preference bucket you were in. >> this particular building was brand new and really this is the one that i wanted out of everything i applied for. in my mind, i was like how am i going to win this? i did and when you get that notice that you won, it's like at first, it's surreal and you don't believe it and it sinks in, yeah, it happened. >> some of our buildings are pretty spectacular. they have key less entry now. they have a court yard where they play movies during the weekends, they have another master kitchen and space where people can throw parties. >> mayor breed has a plan for over 10,000 new units between

now and 2025. we will start construction on about 2,000 new units just in 2020. >> we also have a very big portfolio like over 25,000 units across the city. and life happens to people. people move. so we have a very large number of rerentals and resales of units every year. >> best thing about working for the affordable housing program is that we know that we're making a difference and we actually see that difference on a day-to-day basis. >> being back in the neighborhood i grew up in, it's a wonderful experience. >> it's a long process to get through. well worth it when you get to the other side. i could not be happier. [♪♪♪]

>> good morning welcome to the november 4, 2021 committee. i am extending our thanks from sfgovtv for staffing this meeting. mr. clerk, do we have announcements? >> yes, the minutes will reflect committee minutes are participating through video conference. the board recognizes public access is essential. invites public input.

one moment. i have an echo. public comment is available on each item channel 26 or 99 and sfgovtv p.we will stream the call-in number on the screen. each speaker is allowed two minutes to speak. comments have available by dialing 415-655-0001. meeting id today 24922118986. following that you should dial pound twice to be connected to the meeting. when you are connected you will hear discussions. your line will be muted.

dial star followed by 3 to be added to the speaker list. call from quiet location. speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or your streaming device. alternatively submit in writing. e-mailing them to me audit clerk. john.carroll at sfgovtv or sent through the post to our office in city hall. clerk's office room 244 at city hall. i will add the comments to the file. finally, we are expecting to

appear on november 16, 2021. >> thank you, please call item 1. resolution receiving and approving the annual report for the tourism improvement district and moscone expansion district for fiscal year 2019-2020 submitted as required by the property and business improvement district law. call 415-655-0001. after you enter the id dial pound twice. press star followed by 3 to comment on this item. >> thank you, mr. clerk. i want to welcome chris from

economic and work force development to present on this item along with paul, executive vice president for tourism improvement district and moscone expansion district. please go ahead. we will set the clock at 10 minutes for your presentation. >> thank you, supervisors. program director with the office of economic and work force development. today we are here to here from the tourism and moscone expansion. the fiscal year 2019-2020. there is a clerical error on page 4 from the memo it says 75%. it should be 0.75%. i will send an amended memo to clerk carroll after this.

i would like to thank supervisor chan's office for calling that to my attention. community benefits district are governed by the 1994 act found in streets and highways code in the 36600 section and article 15 of business and tax regulations. this covers the annual reports for 19-20 for the tid andmed. it ensures it covers the plan. we provide a summary memo. the san francisco tourism improvement district and moscone expansion district is two zones. with unis downtown and two is the outer neighborhoods of the city. these are both business assessment districts differing from property assessments.

they are based off percentage of room rate revenue. tid formed in 2009 to expire on december 31, 2023 t.moscone will expire in june 2045. for the tid andmed we reviewed two benchmarks. one is the variance between management plan budget and fiscal year. two. budget amount and actual expenses within the fiscal year. three. whether the tid andmed indicate the fund goes to be carried to the next fiscal year and projects to future fiscal years. the executive vice president is paul. promotion and service and improvements to the convention

center and add enough cost. formed expansion of convention center financing. moscone convention center incentive fund. sales and marketing. future capital improvements and add ministration and reserves. benchmark one comparing the management versus annual budget in the tid financial documents. they have met this benchmark. for benchmark two. med. annual budget included in the financial documents and annual reports. med met this benchmark as well. for the tid budget versus actual. this information was in the financial documents as well as annual reports. tid did meet this benchmark. formed budget. this was in their annual report and financial documents and they

did meet this. for the tid carry forward they did indicate in the annual report and did meet the benchmark. for the med they met in the annual report as well as if they removed funds from report. the findings. the tid andmed were severely impacted by covid-19 19. the assessment formula is based on revenue generated from hotel room purchases in san francisco. this reduction in assessment revenue forced to stabilization fund designed to be drawn upon in any year with lower than expectedmed collections which caused the contributions towards debt service less than cash flow projections. pandemic caused this to exist. the tid assessments were lower

due to pandemic. variance was covered by tid reserve fund. med took out $5 million line of credit comes in 20-21. they mustid ways of payment due to the covid-19 on the revenue. tid expires at the end of 2023. they took early renewal working on the process and receive technical support. in conclusion the tid met the benchmarks and themed melt. prior to the pandemic both districts were successful in meeting the primary purpose of attracting tourism and convention to san francisco and over seaing the debt service on moscone center. the outlooks depend on the re-opening and will be greatly

aided by return of conventions and hotel rooms in san francisco by tourists. i will turn this over to paul to talk about fiscal year 19-20 for both districts. >> thank you, chris and thank you everyone for the opportunity to be here today. the first section i will review the tourism improvement district. related to convention sales generated 355 meetings with $275 million in direct spending. i did want to make a note as i present these numbers the change from the previous year's reports. this is down 83% from the previous fiscal y