>> good morning. welcome to the rules committee for today, monday, december 6, 2021. i am the chair of the committee supervisor aaron peskin joined by vice-chairman delman and committee member supervisor connie chan. our clerk is mr. young. >> committee members participate in this remote meeting through

video as though physically present. we recognize that public access to city services is essential. public comment will be available on each item on the agenda. channel 26, 78 or 99 and --governor rick scott are streaming on the screen. available by (415)655-0001.

call from a quiet location, speak cloly and turn down your television or radio. you may submit public comment in either way. e-mail to the rules committee clerk at vic.yo un g at sfgovtv. if you submit it will be forwarded and included as part of the file. written comments will be sent to city hall room 244. san francisco california 94102. that completes my initial comments. >> thank you. could you please read the first item. >> item 1. campaign and governmental conduct code. permit consultants and to prohibit elected officials,

department heads commissioners and designated employees from soliciting behested payments from interested parties. >> thank you. colleagues, we are back for the sixth time with the behested legislation. my staff earlier circulated to each of you and your offices the latest round of amendments that reflect conversations that my office has had, particularly with nonprofit stakeholders as well as the ethics commission as well as with other supervisors who have weighed in on this. i spoke with the city attorney, who was present this morning and was informed that one of these proposed amendments is in fact substantive. what i would like to do this morning is to make all of the non substantive amendments and hopefully pass out of committee

this morning. i will speak a little bit to why it is urgent that it be done sooner rather than later. i would like to duplicate the file and make the one substantive amendment and keep it in committee for consideration as trailing legislation. before i get into the specifics, let me just kind every mind us of where we have been and how we have gotten here and the basic principle in the legislation are. as you remember in the wake of the nuru scandal our controller did a report and recommended a number of changes and supervisor haney then followed up in september of last year with the introduction of this legislation with regard to behested payments

particularly as related to department heads, and that was in the midst of covid. this has been around here for a year and six committee meetings. the basic principles are pretty simple. we should not be putting ourselves or our city officials in positions of raising money from the parties seeking financial benefit from us. this dynamic has been allowed to persist for too long, and per controller's recommendation this legislation addresses it squarely. the amendments i have made along the way i think do that even more. to put it another way, you are either in the business of making grants to the city or applying for contracts from the city. you can't be in the business of getting contracts with the city

in exchange forgiving money to the city. that is the definition of quid pro quo. i also want to ground this in another principle which is in the realm of the practical. we, and that by i mean we as city officials, need to be able to comply with this. outside stakeholders also need to comply with this. we all need to understand our obligations and responsibilities. the amendments i made to get us to this point that i propose today are in furtherance of that latter practical consideration. in as much as we have tried to cast as broad net as possible, i want to be clear where the prohibition on behested payments need not apply. to that end i would like to make the following non substantive

amendments which you are in receipt of at page 2. let me get my cheat sheet here. lines 19 through 21. at page 4 lines 1 and 2. i propose to define the term grant and provide that people or entities who provide grants to the city are not interested parties for the sake of prohibition on behested payments legislation. if all you do is grant money to the city, then you are not an interested party as defined. this takes care of what some of my colleagues were concerned with with regard to accept and suspend approves. page 3 lines 11 and 12. i would like to exempt from the definition of interested party individuals who attempt to

influence city officials via public speech provided they don't have another financial interest in the matter. there are a number of ways people attempt to influence city officials that are entirely benign and things we should encourage like speaking on step of city hall or attending a rally. that should not make these individuals interested parties. page 3, lines 19-21. page 16, lines 14-16. i propose to limit so listing permits to those who they have made contacts within the last year. at page 4. lines 24 and 25. i propose to exempt uncompensated nonprofit board members from definition of interested party. at page 6 line 25, this is actually a clarification but i

would like to limit the prohibition on indirect solicitations only to identifiable interested parties. one amendment which i propose at page 3 lines 4-6 and page 4 lines 3-4. i will make to the duplicated file. that would make sure if the contract is before the board of supervisors for approval under 9.118, the charter section that requires the board of supervisors to approve contracts over $10 million in cost 10 years in duration or $1 million income to the city that the parties too those contracts are defined as interested parties. the city attorney has said that is substantive. i will do that in the duplicated

file. before i open up to public comment, let me circle around to what i said at the beginning which is to address why there is some urgency here. i note that in the context that this has been going on now since the scandal but over a year since this legislation was introduced and we really have a long overdue duty to cut this behavior out of our government. i always prefer to do things legislatively and not go to the ballot unless we have to go to the ballot. that said, i understand that the ethics commission which has no authority to put this legislation directly on the ballot is considering doing just

that on or before the deadline early next year. i would like to show that this body is doing its job and can adopt this legislation in my conversations with the ethics commission staff, they find these amendments and the body of the legislation to be acceptable and supportable by them so i will prefer that we pass this and not dither into next year when they are poised to put this on the ballot. with that if you have any questions or comments you can state them now or wait until later in the meeting. if not, supervisor chan, i will open it up to public comment. >> thank you, chair peskin.

i want to thank you. i know how hard it is to really and also thank your team for their hard work on this. i know it has been a lot of conversation with many different parties to make sure we get this right, and most importantly that is enforceable. thank you so much for your work on this. >> thank you, supervisor chan. i do want to thank and acknowledge my staff who has worked hard on this. debbie from the human services network who has been a real thought partner with my office in suggesting some clarifications and practical amendments. i would like to thank deputy city attorney and our council here this morning for their help along the way and patrick ford

at the ethics commission for his council and collaboration. supervisor mandelman. >> thank you, chair peskin. thank you for all of your work on this legislation over these past many months. i have been happy to allow and to watch as this process has gone forward. one question that has been brought to my attention that i want to understand how the legislation would work. i get the notion that elected officials with particular issues before us for some reasonable period of time prior to the guest or some to us for some period of time after. i think that makes sense.

i am also understanding as we thumb through right now and i don't think this has changed in any of the amendments the prohibition on soliciting payment from a contract lobbyist. what i have heard and i don't know if it is true. there are hundreds of contact lobbyists that, many of them may or may not have been working on something that appears before the board recently or likely to appear before the board shortly. is that right? is that a problem? is that something i should be concerned about? >> the notion is if someone is getting paid to influence a decision-maker that decision-maker should not be

soliciting behested payments from that party that is paid to influence the decision-maker. >> regardless whether we are talking about a particular issue or contract or thing. in general this set of people if they work for non-profits or for profits who talk to us on a regular basis about stuff impacting the city we should not be calling those people to ask us to find money for non-profits we care about. >> that essential my hope that people who are because that again goes into the notion that there is a quid pro quo. they are carrying water. they get paid for that. we grant them what they desire

and they in-turn, yes, are you proposing language to limit the contact lobbyist prohibition to actual contacts in the last year like we did for permit consultants? is that what you are saying? >> i am trying to understand what it would do and what the intent is. i can imagine there are contact lobbyists. i can imagine people register as contact lobbyists even though they ever really ask for anything but to maintain good relationship with the city. i can imagine on the nonprofit side there might be a similar situation and i guess, i mean, you and i privately discussed. my concern about the ethics rights i have never supported tightening. it is that we box ourselves in ever more tightly and create,

you know, things for people to screw up without necessarily leading to better ethics in the sense of newer gate, for example. i don't know whether this is a concern of mine. it is something raised. thank you for engaging around it. >> if what you are saying, which is, and i hear you, which is if you go down the list of contact lobbyists on the website there are individuals registered as such that many of us have never heard from or have not heard from in years. the way, i think, to deal with that would be what we did for permit consultants to limit them to actual contacts in a period of time. if you haven't heard from making

this up at&t in the last year, they would not be covered. that is an easy change to make. narrowing. i am not the city attorney. that would be nonsub tantive, i would imagine. >> thank you. >> why don't we open up for public comment. any members of the public to comment on this item number 1? >> yes, mr. chair. operations is checking to see if there are callers in the queue. please let us know the callers are ready dial star 3 to be added the queue. for those. on hold wait.we have six callere online to speak. first speaker, please.

>> good morning, supervisors. this is is debbieler man at human services network. we appreciate our work with supervisor peskin's office which we feel has addressed our concerns to protect legitimate fund raising while addressing the ethics issues. we are still working on the piece around attempt to influence which is still vague and we believe overly broad. we think that that provision should be limited to those with a financial interest which is the primary driver in corruption cases. the attempt to influence language includes advocacy that may not involve direct contact with the public official. and that person may not be aware of the attempt to influence. rallies and public forums are one example. it could include things like

sending a tweet or sending a letter to the editor. a big example is petitions. if somebody turned in a petition with a thousand signatures. the public official may not look at the names. >> thank you.

i agree. in some sense this is what the ethics regulations, i think, should be revised to do. i will circle back to that. next speaker, please. >> good morning, chair peskin, supervisors. i am bruce wolf. i am the current chair of the sun shine northern passports. i wholeheartedly support this legislation to address non-profits that ethically do business and fund raise and benefit the people of our great city. i appreciate the work of hsn and your staff. i am tried being embarrassed over the progressive political let's liberal values in san

francisco. we have no control of public officials. i do welcome this. i also believe in fairness and appropriate balance and regulations. to include such advisory bodies like the sunshine ordinance task force. somehow it feels a bit overreaching. compared to those who truly could or would have an effect of the declines we are experiencing today where they hold authority of the financial value which is ordinances to control. i am getting conflicting ethics commission who is charged with implementing and enforcing this legislation and our legal counsel at the sunshine task force. the ethics commission wrote in a written opinion the first initiation that the task force members are not subject to the current spending law.

i am receiving communications the members are quote not commissioners. despite the task force legal counsel's opinion that we are commissioners, but then we don't hold administrative proceedings. it is not clear as to where bodies like the task force it is in regards to who the officers are. >> thank you. i appreciate that. next speaker, please. >> good morning, this is charles head, president of coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. i applaud your advancing this legislation. years ago i was on the civil grand jury that investigated the ethics commission and worked with larry bush to cut out the

cancer quit pro ." larry is now on the ethics commission. he is doing so. i am glad that you are banding together with him. good luck to you all. thank you very much. good morning. >> next speaker, please. >> we can hear you now, mr. pill plow. >> as i said, last week and i will expand on that. i believe that ethics is critical to making the changes work regulations and training on page one line 16 i think there is an and that should come back. page 3, line 6, that should be indented. page 6, line 13. concept of public appeal the referenced in the legislation.

the definition was struck out. i believe that public appeal should be defined on page 4 with the other terms. since i asked last week and didn't get an answer since ethics is the filing officer do these amendments apply to the san francisco unified school district and college district. i understand that the meet and confer process with employee organizations has been completed and, finally, importantly i support this ordinance and believe that any further needed fixes can be done with the trailing legislation of the duplicated file you referenced. thank you for all of your work and all of the work behind-the-scenes to make this happen. i appreciate it very much. >> thank you. any other members of the public for item 1, public comment. >> i believe that was our last public comment on this matter. >> public comment on item 1 is

closed. colleagues. i would like to move the an for mentioned amendments with the exception of the one substantive amendment page 3 line 4-6 and page 4 lines 3 and 4. supervisor mandelman. >> i have two more questions. >> why don't we adopt those amendments then get to the questions. on the amendments a roll call, please. >> on the motion would you like to duplicate the file first? >> no. i would like to duplicate the file after. >> on that motion to amend.

supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor mandelman. >> two more things. apologies. trying to get myself caught up. the two other issues that i understand to have been noting around and i feel like you have dealt with at least one of those. an exception for accept and expend where the board of supervisors takes an action on it. i think that is in here. >> correct. these are the two the mayor's office brought to me. other is exception with organizations with m.o.u.s. i should not presume to know

your questions. >> with regard -- first one yes. that is in there. with regard to the second one. the answer from at least my office is no. the reason i addressed earlier on which is an m.o.u. does not necessarily cure what we are fundamentally going after. you are either in the business of making grant in the city or applying for contracts from the city. you can't be in the business of getting contracts with the city in exchange forgiving money to the city. i am not okay with the m ou exception because there could be m.o.u.s with organizations that give money to the city and get contracts from the city. that is precisely the behavior that is quid pro quo behavior.

corruptor not. respectfully to the mayoral administration yes number one and no number two. >> one example where i think an organization does both of these things. the situation here as i understand it would be a friends of group that sometimes does the work in which there might be an agreement or contract with some kind of work the city wants done. also raising money that the city thinks is valuable making payment to the city or somebody else to do what the city wants. that is the model that you feel is problematic.

is that just the one obvious parks alliance or are there other friends of groups that are doing that, too? >> it is obvious in the instance that you just mentioned and it may be in other places, but it is the notion that there are inherently potential conflicts in that relationship. the fundamental point here is the point around whether or not the fact of an m.o.u. leads to an exemption. i say no to that. i think the body of what we are trying to get to is clearly set forth here. god only nos what else could be in m.o.u.s. the m ou between the department

and third-party is not acceptable to this supervisor. >> the notion there has not been at least through the mayor's office an m.o.u. approved by the board of supervisors. >> it would be approved by the board of supervisors, right? >> it depends on what it is. no, they are approved all of the time by departments that don't come to the board of supervisors as supervisor chan well knows from her days at rec and park. >> before we vote on this with the full board i want to understand implications for any other friends of the group. >> understood. thank you supervisor mandelman. i do hope to prepare some additional amendments along the lines that ms.ler man spoke to.

they are relatively easy as to categories of speech for interested party definitions. mr. chen is aware of those and they are straight forward. with that i would like to duplicate the file and continue the duplicated file to the call of the chair. duplication requires no vote. continuation does. mr. young, a roll call, please. >> on the motion to continue the duplicated file to the call of the chair. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye.

>> the motion passes without objection. >> then, colleagues, before i make a motion to send this item to the full board as committee report with recommendation, let me state maybe the obvious. that is that it is never easy for elected officials to hamstring themselves. as a matter of fact i was reading a story about the creation of the fair political practices act when then i believe governor in his first time jerry brown explained to the parties that were interested in that that the legislature would never pass it because the legislature would never want to tie their own hands. in deed they had to go to the ballot.

i in san francisco we are better than that and we are more courageous than that. if we are not inclined to tie our own hands given what has happened in san francisco and the shame and embarrassment that it has brought the city and county, we have no choice. it is long overdue. i appreciate supervisor mandelman's comments about the law of unintended consequences and the further narrowing of what an elected official can solicit and what the rules are around those solicitations. frankly, colleagues, we are in the business of regulating. we are in the business of making sure that our constituents needs are met. yes, fund-raising particularly

around elections is one of the unfortunate things people in these positions have to do because even with public financing you still have to raise money. i actually on balance think getting us out of the third-party fund-raising business or putting some very bright lines around it is the right thing to do, healthy for our society and we, frankly, should focus as much as we can on regulating and not on fund-raising. we do a lot of fund-raising. they are called bond measures, property taxes. it always, you know, gets me when for instance in 2008 when we went to the voters and asked for $800 million to rebuild san francisco general hospital. the voters of san francisco with the support not only of the san

francisco democratic party which i chaired at the time, but with the republican party anemic as though it may be in two-thirds majority voted to tax themselves for $800 million. then mark zuckerberg gave an additional under $100 million and got his name put on the hospital. it is the peoples hospital. we paid for it. we fund raise all of the time from our generous constituents. they are called property taxes, parcel taxes for the school district. why we are running around asking folks for $2,500 here and $5,000 there, i mean i can't say that i haven't done it. i have. the reality is that the big money comes from the voters of

san francisco in any of that this legislation is about any city firm, department head or supervisor not raising money from interested parties. we have worked to craft and sculpt andnary wrote to definition of interested parties. i would like to make a motion to send to the full board with positive recommendation for consideration tomorrow. we will see what happens tomorrow. i know that the mayor's office has issues. i know that some of my colleagues are concerned this will hamper fund-raising abilities, but let's give it a whirl. i really appreciate the advocates along the way who made

helpful right mature suggestions incorporated in the six meetings along the way. mr. clerk as roll call, please. >> supervisor chan, my apologies. >> thank you, chair peskin. i am not too sure this body is or the legislative branch of government was more korage us. years or decades in the making of this body including from the work you have been involved in limits political donations and establishing the public financing system that works

including supervisor mar's increasing the dollar amount for the matching. also eliminates any interested parties, lobbyist donating to political campaign to elected candidates. all of those measures are in place to allow someone like me working immigrant background from working families with no connection to really big donors to be elected to office. those are the works to this point which frankly i think that is what i see is that again all of this is really back to who can pay? who can pay to influence decision-making process in city government? for elected officials and city department heads for them to

make something happen in the city is that they need to be courting big donors, people with money so that we can make something happen. that fundamental approach creates some of the problems we are seeing, corruption charges we see for someone like mohammed nuru and others that they thought they needed to do that in order to make something happen within the city government. i will leave it like that. i do think this is not -- i look forward to seeing how this will be implemented. i do appreciate what chair peskin mentioned to show that we are committed to do this work and that we to do this work and

to make sure that if we needed to tweak it we can because in the event the ethics commission decides to put this to the ballot, i think there is going to be more challenges to make sure this actually works. we should move forward. >> supervisor mandelman. i do have the duplicated file failed to make the amendment i wanted to make to the call of the chair. we can get to that from a minute. supervisor mandelman. >> thank you, chair peskin. one of the perhaps unfortunate effects of another well meaning piece is the inability of committee members to engage with

each other outside of committee meeting around the legislation before us. i am grateful for the work with other supervisors and with departments and non profits over many, many months to make this legislation work. i remain as i said earlier and you acknowledged concerned about unexpected consequences. this is not a bright line rule. this is not a supervisor going out of business fund-raising from right parties but creating new rules how that works. it is possible and likely that you struck the right balance and that this is legislation i will support at the full board. i am not prepared right now to vote on it, particularly not to

vote on it coming tomorrow. i am going to be a no today. maybe a yes tomorrow after i have gotten these questions addressed. thank you for your work on this. >> thank you, supervisor mandelman. with that we will -- we will go to housekeeping on the duplicated file at page 3 line was 4-6. page 4 lines 3 and 4 as a 9.118 provision that i spoke to that and you are in receipt of on that motion to the duplicated file which includes continuation to the call of the chair. the file as amended, duplicated file as amended a roll call, please. >> chair peskin. would you like to rescind the

duplicated file and i will make the motion to add the one amendment and continue to the call of the chair. on that motion roll call, please. >> motion to amend and continue to the call of the chair. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> motion passes without objection. >> motion to send the original file as amended with recommendations as a committee report. roll call, please. >> on that motion. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman.

>> no. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> the motion passes with vice chair mandelman dissenting in committee. >> we will discuss this more with the rest of the board tomorrow. next item, please. >> item 2. hearing to consider three members to the food security task force. members of the husband lick who wish to comment -- public who wish to comment call 415-655-0001. 24837 is 554296-pound and pound again. dial star 3 to speak.

system prompt will indicate you raised your hand. wait until you are unmuted. right now star 3 to speak. we will get to that part of it after discussions. >> thank you, victor. we have two applicants for three seats. why don't we hear in the order they appear for seat number 12. meredith terrel. >> good morning, supervisors. thank you for considering me for food security task force seat 12. i worked with community-based organizations in san francisco focused on food during emergencies for 17-years. i am excited to be nominated. i have served on the food security task force in 2010 as co-chair. i currently attend meetings and

have engaged this year. i hear the message loud and clear the security task force is charged with re-thinking food security. i am looking forward to joining current members to seek participation throughout san francisco and change the way we approach the essential topic. we need many voices, strong partnerships to help address policy in san francisco around food security. i hope to bring security during emergency to the group. since 2010 i worked with american red cross focusing on community inclusion and food access. we can agree the covid-19 response laid to bear inequities across food access in san francisco. one size does not fit all to meet community needs. we need to do better. we have made food available with

the view that culturally appropriate food is a luxury. it is imperative to allocate needed resources. i will seek to gather voices from the community to represent needs of seniors. having focused on senior population during my time with the meals on wheels san francisco it is essential to ensure their voices are present and needs are met. thank you. >> thank you. questions or comments? seeing none. we will move on. >> good morning. can you hear me. >> yes. i apologize nor not pronouncing your last name correctly.

reece. i am with the san francisco african-american faith-based could amlition. i have been in this roll for three years. our mission and goal for 33 churches in san francisco area, bayview, hunters point, tenderloin and pacific islanders and people of color city-wide. this coalition was launched in november 2016 to address the high priority health needs for service. the health issues in our congregations. [indiscernable] housing, mental health and hunger. at the time our pastors prioritize hunger as third most present need. thanks to the covid-19 all of

our work has been shifted to emergency response to hunger. for the last two months we shifted our concentration to food security for our target population. donations an philanthropic organizations and partnering with dph with the new deal, the food bank and more to serve our most impacted target area. while doing so i learned there is still a need for long-term self-sufficient programs in our community. with technology and experience i can be a valuable asset for the food security task force. i have identified and established relationships with the black farmers who are interested in partnering with

african-american cultural community organization in our neighborhood. after my retirement from the airline industry after 45 years of international experience i am excited to work with the task force when we thinking a broader approach to the community issues and needs. taking advantage of the trust relationship coalition has established with our faith-based clientele. innovated approaches are yet to be tried to this new normal society in which we serve. thank you in advance for your consideration in appointing me as a member of the task force. >> thank you. are there any members of the public to comment on item 2?

>> there are no callers in the queue. >> if you have not done so dial star 3 to be added the queue. for those on hold, please continue to wait. if you would like to be added the queue press star 3 to be added at this time. i will give them a few moments. it does not appear to be anybody in the queue for public comment at this time. >> public comment is closed. colleagues, if there is no objection and no comment, i would like to make a motion to

have meredith terrel serve in seat 12 and guille rmo reece in seat 19. anybody who represented the community-based organization to provide nutrition support and works to increase food security of san francisco residents is welcome to apply for seat 19. on the motion to forward with recommendation meredith terrel for seat 12 and reece for seat 14. roll call, please. >> supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> the motion passes without objection. >> thank you. can you please call the next item. >> item 3.

hearing to consider appointing one member term ending april 30, 2025 to the police commission. members of the public to comment call 415-655-0001. id248371554296. pound pound. if you haven't done so press star 3 to line up to speak. >> thank you. colleagues as you will recall, patrick did not apply to continue and her term expired i wang to thank ms. dejesus. we have been waiting for applicants. we have some impressive applicants before us.

first chattopadhyay has withdrawn. there are four applicants for the seat before us today. i want to thank them all for applying. thank and acknowledge the many letters of support and e-mails that we have receive. with that if there are no opening comments, i would like to open this up in the order that they appear on the agenda for opening statements. from the applicants for the police commission starting with david rizk. >> good morning. thank you for the opportunity. good morning, supervisors and

mr. clerk. i want to talk to you this morning about why i am interested in this position why i would be a good fit. modernizing policing has been a passion of mine for a number of years. i have spent a lot of time working on it from many different ago gels which i think -- angles which qualify me for this position. when i first became a lawyer i worked for two federal judges. i worked on federal cases for them. i saw many different criminal cases and learned the way the judges view prosecutions. then i worked at a san francisco-based nonprofit called electronic frontier foundation that looks at civil liberties issues in emerging technology issues. i went into private practice as pro bono attorney handled civil rights and excessive force cases

from police departments and innocence project matters exonerating folks who her the victim of bad police work. then i joined citizenry view which oversees citizen police. that operates much like the police commission. it hears misconduct cases and reviews policy changes for bart police. now, i work as an assistant public defender. i have seen hundreds of searches, arrests, investigations, good and bad, and i am very aware of the impact and benefits of law enforcement in the way they interact with community. finally, i am a member of the

bar association of san francisco task force. lawyers, judges, prosecutors, law enforcement that weigh in on issues in the criminal justice system. through that organization i have built relationships with leadership in all of the major criminal justice agencies in san francisco. da office, public defender, police commission, d.p.a. i am fortunate to weigh in on most of the most important issues that have come through the police commission in recent years and written dozens of letters and white papers and research memos offering research, legal counsel and advice to decision-makers in hopes of improving the types of policy outcomes we have in san francisco. those are my basic call fixes. i want to say a little bit about my approach to this work. as you all know and is obvious

for the last several years in the united states. police reform and oversight is hard work. it can be extremely challenging, involves competing interests with high stakes. i had a front row at bart. i have been on the receiving end on oversight committee of anganguish of family members. i heard anxiety of members of the public fearful of being caught alone at night on the platform by the trains or in the parking lots. i have essential heard from commander staff about their own safety concerns about desire to do their job and the difficulties of their job. with this experience and what it taught me is that in

evidence-based experience-based pragmatic approach to negotiating reforms that honor first the community needs and build trust between the community and the department is important. it is essential to guaranteeing public safety. i also think de-escalating rhetoric in difficult situations and reaching compromises is incredibly important. it often brings the best result. a few more things of my guiding principals. a few years ago i wrote a brief supporting the polis commission challenging the use of force policy in san francisco. it is modern iced and we wrote

to the court of appeals formulating policy that preserved life and promotes trust between police agencies and communities they serve. fundamental duty of local government. i think that is the mandate of the police commission. a lot more the police commission does. i personally look although several years old now to the obama white house's 21st century policing principles. there are six of them that form the basis for what us d.o.j. did when it came to san francisco to urge 272 recommendations that they ultimately made to the department. those are things like increasing community input to policy and oversight, leveraging new technology to improve transparency, building capital

through community engagement, neighborhood problem solves. community polices is something san francisco made great strides in. training and education. the fact is that there are shortages of police officers state-wide. it needs to be a profession people continue to look up to. that involves training and honoring office of wellness and safety. these would guide my approach to working on the police commission. i want to say little bit about diversity. my father's family is arab. migrate grandfather came to the united states to sell pots and pans. my family remembers that. my family was fortunate to take the opportunities that this

country provided to become professionals and to turn towards public service. my father was a doctor. i took that up myself. i followed it. i am assistant public federal defender in san francisco. i am dedicated to a diverse group of candidates. primarily people of color, spanish speakers, some new to the city. very diverse group. my job is to understand and emphasize and advocate for people who have a tremendous range of experiences and backgrounds. i represented everybody from immigrants to lifelong residents of filmore district and everybody in between. this is important. as long time citizen of the

city, i was born here. i would be proud and i think i have experience with the city and communities here to serve the board of supervisors well as a police commissioner. thank you for your time and consideration of my application. >> thank you for your application. you appear to be eminently qualified. today or at some point in the future this appointing authority or another appointing authority that we can find a place for you on the police commission. with that we go to the next applicant. jesus gabriel yanez. >> good morning, chair peskin and mandelman and chan. i have been devoting myself to

providing violence prevention and creating safety programs, mental health, clinical evidence informed programs in san francisco's community-based organizations since 1997. as a mental health specialist i have been involved in a wide range of partnerships and collaborations early in the 2004-2005. a group of community providers saw a need to better impact on systems involved young people involved with street activity. that led us to create a community response protocol to reach out though those individuals not receiving support services.

through those effortings we created volunteer group of outreach workers, professionals that reestablished the program that was devoted to making sure those young adults were receiving the support and treatment needs and that treatment needs were met. the effort led to us establishing the community response network, a program to expand to impact on city-wide communities. we incorporated partners from filmore district, western addition, chinatown, bayview-hunters point and expanded efforts to ensure we were cultural responsive to the

needs of the different communities in san francisco. for our efforts we receive a certificate of honor from the board of supervisors in 2005. in 2007, i was appointed to mayor newsom's leadership counsel and planning work group to establish the violence prevention plan for san francisco which was put into effect between 2008 and 2013 as advisory member with the community assessment and referral center. i work with the public defender's office and district attorney's office and leadership at san francisco police department to craft language and create protocols for the booking and detention of juveniles which the san francisco police department general order 7.01. in addition to my work

collaborating with nonprofit organizations and juvenile probation department, public defender's office, i was selected as a groups fellow by the department of children youth and families in 2010. an opportunity that gave me access to working with a broad group of community leaders to determine what it is that this city can do differently to better impact those families and individuals that are over represented in our criminal justice systems. my whole career has been devoted to creating alternatives and ensuring that community voice is being included in the different processes that our city has in order to create public safety. one of the particular goals that

i would have as a police commissioner is to ensure that we are utilizing trauma-informed care approaches. that we are ensuring when there areis departments that are -- incidents escalating as a result of street incidents that we have a police force trained in containment and deescalation, police force connected to the communities that they serve so that they can make the right decision as far as resourcing and making sure that those individuals that are often times coming into contact with the system solely because of their conditions, mental health conditions, be it their displacement situations, having

to live in transitional housing or on the streets that we are working to make sure that each and every one of those individuals is also being respected, their rights are adhered to and we make every effort possible to make sure that we are not criminalizing situations that have more to do with social conditions as opposed to a criminal activity or a, you know, that they are not being criminalized solely for being individuals who do not necessarily have the resources to access housing, to access transportation. i think in particular my goal considering this, you know, the

main issues that we have in this city with accountability, with ensuring the resources in place have an effective impact. i would love to see us move towards creating communication between the immigrant community and the san francisco police department. i believe our commission can play a role in facilitating that conversation. we know with improved communication, communities feel more comfortable reaching out to create a proactive approach to addressing incidents and containing situations before they escalate into issues that need to be dealt with by the criminal justice system. as immigrant i have been personally impacted by the manner in which the police

department has interfaced with the laten x community. i believe that my experience working with the broad coalition of partners in every community in san francisco gives me insight to be able to understand the needs of different communities in san francisco and works to the cultural new answers of every subculture into account when makings disease decisions -- decisions about public safety. i live on 16th. i see a lot of interface between the police department and the folks that are coming to access services here at the native-american center or mental

health program that is right down the block from here. i see the positive interaction that are an outcome of our efforts such as the compassionate alternative response teams and crisis intervention teams that receive the capacity building training that i believe every officer on our streets should meet provided within order for us to make sure that we are containing de-escalating and connecting people to the supports that will help them rehab it tail the need that they have in their life and connect to those services that will help them get out of the situations that put them in, you know, in the line of contact. lastly, i really believe that we

have an opportunity. there are 400 plus pages of recommendations from the d.o.j. i know we are making progress in improving our department. i also know that we need to be very, very steady and proactive and we need to make sure that there is true communication and accountability, quantifiable and qualitative information that will inform the direction we are going to take this department. i appreciate the opportunity to presenting my call fixes. i -- i would love to involve myself in a greater level to develop a safer community for

all. grateful to present before you today. >> thank you, sir. if there are no questions or comments from committee members we will go to the next applicant listed. stephen schwartz, lulula flame. please proceed. >> i know he was with us earlier. >> i am with you. prepared to make my statement. i want to say that i am known as lulu around the city as an

activist. ll an flame. i haven't changed my name. it is an e-mail address that i had for many years. anyway, i believe my call fixes for the police commission are unique. people over use the word unique. i am a transgender female. i don't approach the supervisor as a token, novelty or representative of the transcommunity. in my quotemale unquote career i served 10 years as staff writer for the "san francisco chronicle." i served as member of another san francisco appointed body.

simplification commission from 96-99. i lived most of my life in san francisco. in the last four years i have undergone physical attacks that trans women suffer in the city. i suppose all trans people do. i know about trans women. i have investigated a process for relief. i interacted twice with police account ability regarding transissues. supervisor peskin knows i can get low crisis. i will be as brief as i can. i am committed to support modern efficient just and socially enforcement law enforcements. i studied police operations around the world including mexico, central america, peru,

eastern europe, other places where violence and lawen informationment and other issues are serious issues. i want to stress i am experienced as international human rights investigator. i worked for united, worked for the nether lands and royal dutch government. for the united states government. investigating cases that i would say most investigators will never have to deal with. mass murder, atrocities. very difficult things to see. i often talk about what i saw and how it affected me. piles of dead kids are pretty dead to deal with. worse is when you see dead children with eyes still open.

i say that to indicate the kind of person i am. multi link gal. bilingual in spanish. speak other languages that are relevant. european languages. [indiscernable] i speak russian. law enforcement in the city. our city can provide a global model for the future of law enforcement. that is why i seek this appointment and intend to accomplish. i will add a couple more little things i said to others when i sent out an e-mail about my desire to serve in this capacity. i believe policing in america is obsolete. police institutions are 19th century. it needs modernized and changed in many, many ways.

it may sound strange. barcelona showed us how to do this. they have police bodies rooted in the community. recruit from community. train people to work with the community. to respond to the community. i could give you a lecture. i won't. there was a time when the police were hated, hated, loathed in that part of spain. the police now are trusted there. it is extra ordinary to see in a city with as much of a revolutionary past as barcelona loves its police officers. i am for language diversity. i can tell stories when i was a reporter. we have to listen be to rank and file. reporters go and interview troops in war zones. it is times to interview the

troops in war dozen. we need to hear what they think and how they live and what they feel about the issues they confront. i am for the model for women police. it has problems with honor killings and other issues. the decision was made that the police would include as many women as possible to make it as progressive police body to carry this society forward. i am for that. two other things. one thing is important. we have to deal with mass crime, mass looting. i will say something many, many people would find out rage us. i believe vigilante is worst than crime. i don't like it when i hear that

the store owners have to arm themselves because they are frightened of mass crime. there are ways away from this. the main way is to prevent vigilante. there is a lot more to say. i am a talkative person. i will add one thing. i don't know if it is appropriate to say this. this wasn't originally my idea. this idea was brought to me by rang and file officers in company a who have interacted with sometimes typically positively, sometimes negatively. they trust me. i trust them. it was officers from company a that came to me to say did you know you can present yourself as an applicant. you don't have to run for election. they said i should do this.

i went ahead and made my application. i hope you will consider the fact that i have been for social justice since i was born. i have had many different experiences. i will never cease fighting for social justice. one last thing. after january 6th, people who say they hate police have a problem with me. the police department was all of the problems we have in this country protect me, protect us all. on january 6th, they protected our democracy. i want us to have police that we all trust, we all respect, we all obey when they are correct. as i said we can make the city a model of modern policing for the world. thank you, members.

>> thank you. last but not least we will go to veronica fimbres. >> good morning, supervisors. i am veronica fimbres. i applied for this position a little while ago, over a year, i believe. i was interested in serving on this particular commission because i think that there is a lot of work to be done. my experience as a nurse. i have been a nurse over 38 years. safety nurse at sanquenton and community associate for the department of public health where i work. i have experience with working with police and i have experience on both sides of the law. i have jailed before and i have

experienced the law before. i remember that this office was created. it was originally called the office of citizens complaints. it was run by mary dunlap to regulate and oversight of police department. i worked with all police chiefs we have had up until greg with my last police chief i worked with. i changed a lot of laws and rule that happen in the jail working with the sheriff's department. for transgenders. i am the first transgender officer in the history of the city and county of san francisco and serve appointed by the board of supervisors in the late 1990s. i served at the pleasure of three mayors. mayor willie brown, newsom and

ed lee. over 14 years and eight months. as a person that has experienced the policing, i think the mental health part of polices is the most important. i want to make sure the people, citizens of san francisco receive the best policing that is possible in our city and in our state. i think that as a black trans woman i am concerned about the things that other citizens are concerned about and mentioned by the other speakers who have presented their issues here. i think that ones we get the police force and proper oversight of police force a lot of issues citizens are having will stop the complaining and

abuse that is done by the police to citizens. i would like to see the murders of trans people of color solved. my girlfriend mariah was murdered not too long ago. her murder is still not solved by the police department. i would like to see action taken be on that. i think that more important than anything we have to show and the reason i run is to show that transgenders can do more than just walk through the streets. we have viable important part to play in society. i want people to recognize that. that is why i seek to be on the police commission. >> thank you. thank you for that and your past service. with that, colleagues. why don't we go to public comment on item 3.

are there any members of the public to testify on the appointment of a new police commissioner to seat number 3? >> please dial star 3 to speak. if you are on hold wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. i believe we have five online with three in line to speak. first caller, please. >> hello, supervisors. i am the vice chair of the health commission. i am also the former chair of the youth commission. i am here to speak as member of the democratic club, one of the

vice presidents. i could-chair political action committee meeting with kevin ortiz. i am here to speak in support of jesus yamez for seat three. it is important to have representation of the latin x community on the police commission especially by people with experience at the behavioral health system. i work at a homeless shelter and i have seen some of the amazing work that the team has been able to accomplish so far with the behavioral health approach for the most vulnerable people on the streets who are coping with dire circumstances. i truly believe that jesus has that experience as well as from

working within the community but having personal experiences coming up through the city as immigrant. i wanted to enforce that the democratic club has asked for continuing latino support. thank you for all of the amazing work that you have done. thank you. >> next caller, please. >> i am ron sickle, director of

justice services. i am speaking on behalf of jesus. i have known him for 20 years in many capacities. i have worked alongside him when he was co-chair of juvenile justice providers association as well as on individual cases involved in the justice system. i have a tremendous respect for his thoughtfulness and intuition. i am involved in juvenile justice reform, transitioningal justice reform. one statement repeated is the first place of contact and reform is police. if we don't have them the rest of this will not be nearly as effective. consequently, one of the biggest

communications gaps is between the agencies working on this and the police. i feel strongly we need someone on the commission to understand it deeply and who is part of the community greatly affected by the justice system. a commissioner connected to the multitude of people and agencies involved with people involved in and affected by the system. we need someone who is completely trusted by the community as well as who understands working with the systems affecting their lives with positive reforms for the future. jesus has the unique combination of intellectual and academic understanding of the issues. intuitive understanding due to intimate involvement and years of experience with all of the different departments and offices that are part of the justice system. i met him 20 years ago.

>> year time has elapsed. if you can turn your camera off during or deliberations that would be very much appreciated. next speaker, please. >> good morning. director of road map initiative collaborative effort. i have submitted a letter of support on behalf of the appointment of jesus to the commission. i have had the pleasure of working with mr. yanez20 years. i have seen the work he has done for youth and violence prevention programs. it impacted nose we serve and i have seen the impacts on

developing the next generation of leaders in the community. his legacy of leadership development speaks for i was. -- for itself. he has advocated for best practice intervention to address the issues. it is my belief that living in the urban environment poses unique challenges, to youth, young adults and families. he understands the needs of these individuals by facilitating connections. his work and experience have been unique and vital perspective. i support his selection. when polices is scrutinized more than ever these are needed for the department to improve community trust and being seen as vital partner in public safety in the city. thank you for your

consideration. i am hopeful you will consider mr. yanez for this position. >> next speaker, please. >> good morning. i am the manager for the latino task force. it is agencies working on covid response and support for latino community. i am calling in support to jesus yanez as candidate for police commission. i have known him for 20 years. i want to echo what people said already in support of him. in the time that he has worked with so many young people, they have now become productive and responsive citizens in the community. also, the breadth of his work over the last years in ensuring

we have healthy and productive citizens in our community. i am district 5 resident. i can speak to the copy of his impact city-wide not just one community and one neighborhood. i do support his candidacy. we would love to see him on the police commission. we look forward to him bringing all of the relevant experience that he has, in particular his on the ground experience where we move away from politics, move forward and actually realize the great ideas that city government can come up with. he has a proven track record of that and that is what we want to see in our community. someone who can it is in city government and realize policies and programs and initiatives on the ground. that is why i am calling to support jesus yanez.

thank you. >> next speaker. [indiscernable] >> we can't hear you, speaker. >> hello. this is julie tron in support of david rizi. i have worked with the department for six years. i was named to the commission working group prior to any involvement from the department of justice. i was then named to negotiate the policy with the poa prior to vote by the commission. we did so for 20 hours over two days. we were unable to reach full agreement. unanimously supported the

appeal. without david's amazing work as city attorney and his brief we may not have succeeded to uphold the use of force which is a model for the state. i sat on two working groups, two with david and the chief strategic plan with the traffic force 7.01 involvingoff -- juveniles. the volunteers doing this work are frustrated by commissioners who lack time to take this serious work. i have worked directly with david on a host of issues. as member of the bar association. he is our go to for complicated positions. i have worked closely with jesus who i trust you know by now who weighed in and supported david for her position.

it is critical to have commissioners with expertise and time. this is important time and police response. he comes to you, david comes with expertise and eyes wide open what this takes to accomplish the job. i would ask any applicants for the commission seat about involvement with the working groups, commission hearings to determine if they are fully aware of the work involved going forward. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> that was the last public comment for this item. >> okay. public comment for item 3 is closed. is there one more speaker? >> one more speaker. >> all right. please proceed. >> hi. this is kevin ortiz with the democratic club speaking in my

personal capacity. the san francisco club has for over 40 years advocated for latinos represented at government from supervisor to commissions as well. on april 22, 2021, we released a letter advocating for the seat of jesus to be represented and replaced by someone of latin x heritage to represent the values of jesus who had given time for the police commission. we ask today that we move forward and support the appoint mess of jesus yanez. it is important to take into account the latino community. we have heard from the task force and democratic club who did a letter on this issue.

it is important the community continues to be heard and represented in these spaces as we know that police brutality and issues with over policing tends to happen to communities of color especially latino and black community. i ask today that you support jesus for this appointment moving forward. thank you for your time and consideration. >> thank you, mr. ortiz. no other members of the public. >> we have one more. >> go ahead. >> i am marion. i was the former policy director

of the san francisco department of police accountability. it is a position i retired from in 2020 after working for over 20 years at the department of police accountable, formally office of citizen complaint. i continue to do police oversight into these throughout california, oregon and washington. my comments concern the police commission applicant david rizi who i met as the policy director in 2016. he was part of a collaborative working group to revise the police department use of force policy. this work took enormous research, discussion and absolutely end less collaborative with the police department, city represents, community advocates and police commission. david was an instrumental

participant in these really relentless meetings. it ultimately resulted in use of force policy that if you look throughout the state. it set the standard. it was an amazing time and david was an instrumental part. not only was this use of force policy so important but afterwards the police union did everything to stop it from being put in place. david's work on the briefs was so significant because it was so important in solidifying the position the police commission could set policy. that work that he did was so vital. not only then did he do this work on san francisco police policy but he -- >> thank you very much. it is good to hear from you

after a long time. any ore members of the public for public testimony on item 3? >> one additional. >> go ahead. >> hi, good morning. i amvaller re. here to speak on supporting jesus as police commissioner. i want to say that often times city commissions are for political appointties or those ready for a political career. jesus comes from the community, has worked for the community for many, many years. he does not have an alternative agenda except to be fair and bring a voice to the commission that would be super-helpful to the commission as you approach these issues at hand.

i know that he had a current turmoil with defund the police. jesus will bring a community be voice to that debate and discussion. we highly recommend jesus as a police commissioner. thank you so much for taking his name into consideration. thank you. >> thank you. any last members of the public to speak on this item? >> we have pomore people that just called in. >> go ahead. >> this is rebecca young. i i have been a member of the criminal justice task force for two years. i have come to know and work closely with david rizi.

there are competitive candidates. the community liaison would be important. only one of the candidates before the board today is a subject matter expert and that is david rizi. he know the meyer's act, understands m.o.u., understands and writes about it and educate others about what the issues are. it would be very added boost. we would lose him. i hope he is appointed here. it would be a necessary added boost to the police commission if san francisco is movingforward on police reform. >> next speaker.

>> good morning. i am selina, executive director at horizon limited. i am here in support of jesus yanez for police commissioner. my colleagues have explained why he would be excellent for this position. he devoted his life to violence prevention initiative, part of community response, community referrel dinner. he has been positioned to have a unique perspective. i want to say he is a trusted member of the latino community.

lifting our issues and our voice. he is currently working on the latin x safety plan as consultant for the vocational school which is in line with his experience in this work. i want to be brief. i know others will be talking. again, we in the latino community feel that he would represent us. thank you so much. >> thank you. that, i believe, concludes public comment. am i correct? >> yes, that was the last public comment for this item. >> public comment is closed on item 3. the matter is in the hands of the committee. i want to thank all four applicants that appeared before us today for applying and being willing to serve and credentials. i think, colleagues and i don't

want to put words in your mouth on that two of them rise to the top. first two we heard from mr. rizk and mr. yanez and we received testimony on both of their behalves. i would like to think that both of them could and should become dated on this body for a while we did not have an embarrassment of riches now we do. there are seats expiring in a few short months. the mayor has an apment minute perhaps we can reach to see if the mayor is interested. i am chair of rules committee in 2022 we can consider one of those applicants for a seat that

is coming up in april. with those opening comments i will turn it over to you two, supervisor chan. >> thank you, chair pass ken. chair -- chair peskin. i believe that it is great to have diverse school of thought. diversion background for the make up of any regulatory body for our city government in all level through all of the decision-making process. as far as i have been on the seat as member of the rules committee we have appointed mr. larry ee and jim burns and

mr.mac. >> carter over stone. >> thank you so much. now three members to the police commission. very diverse. mr. yee is a union advocate for the chinese community. jim burnings is an immigrant lawyer and mr. carter. the new generation, again, the involvement for another attorney, i believe. i think that for me i am definitely looking for someone especially in the absence of commissioner petra. someone from the latino and

latin x community and think about being a voice for that community. kind of a diverse school of thought. thinking about really a long time working community. very specific in the sense where on behalf of the community dealing with law enforcement and what can be an alternative solution to bring those alternative solutions to the table. not just in philosophy or ideology but to understand on the ground the purpose. it is time that, you know, giving a lot of concerns among public safety. i think it is time to really have an intellectual honest and pragmatic conversation. i am a firm believer at this point. i think that i have a lot of

concerns worries about the optics that exist out there. i think all four condaydats that spoke on it. i do not believe that the public safety and social justice are mutually exclusive for our community. i doubt motives for anyone speaking otherwise. i look for someone who demands public safety for communities of color and with the mind of understanding social justice can be within that conversation as well. i am here and ready to make that decision today. i am ready to support the candidate that, you know, on this list that can represent the community here. i think that jesus yanez is a

good option to consider today. i would urge your support. but i also think that there are opportunities. chair peskin we have opportunity in april to consider other candidates with the ability to serve in 2022. thank you. >> thank you for the directions or suggestions as to direction on a tough choice. supervisor mandelman. >> thank you, chair peskin. i think i would like to begin by expressing my gratitude for commissioner jesus and her long service to the commission. she took the job very seriously and worked very hard at it. as a bonus she was a three for.

latino, woman, and queer. we have a number of excellent candidates in front of us. two are the top two. both of them are going to talk in terms of gender representation and in terms of sexual orientation representation as well. it is not a great thing for this commission not to have any queer people on it. that being said, both of the folks who seem to be the top contenders would be important additions. it is meaningful to me that commissioner recommended david

rizk and the bar association recommended him. not queer or a woman, i think he would make important contributions. he also did address a concern i have. he don't have time for that. each of the folks. there is, i think, not a necessary tension but a challenge for the commission in addressing both the need to advance reforming in a way that enhances public safety. i did appreciate mr. rizk addressed that and suggested his experience overseeing the bart police gives him the background he needs not only to create more response i and just police department but one that does the

job of preventing and involving crime objectively. i hope we can find away for both candidates to be on there. that is all i got to say right now. thanks. >> i think, supervisor mandelman, you touched on the struggle we have. thank you to all four applicants. we are circling around two. i would like to have the cake and eat it, too, to get both of them on there now or in is not too distant future. there are a number of ways to do that. yes, there is mr. rizk's knowledge as attorney in the field and experience there and mr. yanez's experience with law enforcement, police reform on community side. they both have things a lot of things going for them.

i think supervisor chan suggested we go with mr. yanez today there. is another alternative which is that we can continue this a week and send whatever we decide as committee report next week before our last board meeting for the year. i note that our colleague supervisor ronan weighed in with a letter in support of mr. yanez. is also a big fan of mr. rizk. i don't think i know because i spoke with her this morning was also very supportive of a notion of figuring out a way to get everybody on. this could open up a little time to talk to the mayor as to whether she is interested in either one of those candidates or not totally within her

prerogative. i think while everything is on the table we have a suggestion from supervisor chan that i am 100% okay with. go with mr. yanez and send to the full board and vote on him next week and take up mr. rizk at future date or continue one week and decide next week to send a committee report so we would be voting at full board on the same day. what is your pleasure, colleagues? >> i am down with continuance. i think that -- i mean it is in a different topic and item. we are not really able to talk about things like this because

of the brown act until we come into session in closed hearing. this is frankly, you know, the first time all three of us in the committee to have this conversation and thinking about it. i am happy to continue these items for conversation publicly. during our committee hearing to give us time knowing that both of you what your thoughts are allows me to give it some thought, too, not knowing, chair peskin you have the conversation with supervisor ronan but now that i know that perhaps there is opportunity for conversation with the mayor's office i am down for that so we have consensus. police commission is a critical body and requires us to be

thoughtful and a body to work together. whenever i get a chance to talk to these candidates for the police commission candidates, i like to know what they think of the commission chair cohen's leadership. would they support the leadership and work together? i am down. >> okay. colleagues. how about we continue this item one week to our meeting next monday and then whatever we decide will go to the full board for the 14th of december. if there is no objection to that, mr. clerk, could you please call the roll. >> motion to continue to

december 13th. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> the motion passes without objection. >> next item, please. >> next item on the agenda item 4. hearing to consider appointing three members to terms ending july 1, 2022, and two members terms ending july 1, 2023 to the children youth and their families oversight and advisory committee. to comment call 415-655-0001. id24871554296. press pound pound. if you haven't done so dial star 3 to speak.

>> we will hear from the three applicants for the five seats. >> thank you, supervisor peskin. one of the candidates is not able to attend. she has a conflict with class schedule. i will speak on her behalf. she is the first applicant for consideration. >> okay. i don't know that we need you to do that. i think that we have all looked at the written file and i think ms. c.u. rry is good to go for seat 7. we don't need you to speak on her behalf. why don't we go to jennifer salerno for seat 11. >> good morning. thank you for considering me

seat 11 on children, youth families oversight committee. >> i worked at ymca for five years created and managed youth force development serving 150 to 200 young people between 14-24 every year. majority of youth we served were current or former sfufc students. i worked with sfusd and other agencies for work force education to former students. program manager for excel managing two after-school programs one at the high school and one at the academy. my primary focus while at ymca was on providing resources for participants and families. i place tremendous emphasis for

healing from trauma. i believe in a trauma-informed approach to supporting young people and families and will work to advance these initiatives. i worked in higher education for six years at usf and sanford. i focused on financial aid support and creating and implementing diversities. i left ymca in october and now work as senior work force development specialist. my role isn't exclusively on youth i support families around retaining employment so they cannot only survive but thrive in san francisco. being first generation high school and college student raised by single mother i understand how crucial it is to support our children and families ensuring they have equitable access to resources and be opportunities. thank you very much for your

consideration and time today. >> thank you and thank you for applying. last but not least julie roberts-ph un g. >> we can hear you. >> i want be to thank you for considering my application to oac and put in a good word for jayda curry. i have appreciated learning more about the ways dcyf supports families and working with team on the shared goal of deepening racial equity in san francisco. over the life of the pandemic i have seen how the grantees showed up for families of color. during this time i worked

closely with communities in the tenderloin where my children go to school and western addition where my family lives. i have watched resources that leave gaps in tenderloin, treasure island, other neighborhoods where i am grant families live. food, testing, vaccine access, computers or community hubs they are left out and community leaders have had to do hard work to close gaps. during my time i have advocated for increased transparent for students and families spanish, chinese and seven languages they support. filipino, arabic and vietnam niece not through dcyf but tph

and other systems. it is both important to help connect these systems and it has been challenges to see how we struggled to do that over the pandemic. i have appreciated dcyf staff providing child care and developed deep appreciation for the staff to support students and allow them to stay in san francisco. i have addvo kayed for communities in san francisco for too long. pacific islander, undocumented and transyouth and families. honor to be part of the efforts in these difficult years and given me a deep appreciation for staff, board and partners. i hope you will support my application to tip be to serve on this board and to continue to advocate for issues as we navigate beyond the covid-19 pandemic. where i served in seat six last

term based on the age of my children i believe seat eight is the best fit for me at this time. thank you for everything you do for san francisco youth and families. >> thank you. are there any members of the public to testify on this item number 4? >> we are checking for callers. if you have not done so dial star 3 to be added the queue to speak. for those on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. we have onelitionner but nobody in line to -- one listener with nobody in line be to speak. >> we will close public comment for item 4. we thank the applicants and the two reapplying for their seats for applying again.

colleagues, i think we should a motion is in order to have jayda curry for seat 7, based on what julie just said to the age of her child move her from seat 9 to seat 8. and to have ms. salerno be seat number 11 as she applied for. if there are no objection to say that, i will say that is a motion and ask the clerk to call the roll. >> on that motion. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> the motion passes without objection. >> we are adjourned. better.

san francisco department of environment is a place where

climate hits the street. we know that we don't have all the answers. we need to support our local champions, our local community to find creative solutions and innovations that help us get to zero waste. >> zero waste is sending nothing to landfill or incineration, using reuse and recovery and prevention as ways to achieve zero waste. the grant program is a grant program specifically for nonprofits in san francisco to divert material from landfill. it's important to find the san francisco produce market because there's a lot of edible food that can be diverted and they need positions to capture that food and focus on food recovery. >> san francisco produce market is a resource that connects

farmers and their produce with businesses in the bay area. i think it's a basic human right to have access to healthy foods, and all of this food here is available. it's a matter of creating the infrastructure, creating jobs, and the system whereby none of this goes to waste. since the beginning of our program in july 2016 to date, we've donated over 1 million pounds of produce to our community partners, and that's resulted in over 900,000 meals to people in our community, which we're very proud of. >> carolyn at the san francisco produce market texts with old produce that's available. the produce is always excellent. we get things like broccoli, brussels sprouts, bell peppers.

everything that we use is nice and fresh, so when our clients get it, they really enjoy it, and it's important to me to feel good about what i do, and working in programs such as this really provides that for me. it's helping people. that's what it's really about, and i really enjoy that. >> the work at the produce market for me representing the intersection between environment and community, and when we are working at that intersection, when we are using our resources and our passion and our energy to heal the planet and feed the people, nothing gets better than

>> you know i've always wanted

to do this job that drives my parents crazy we want to help people i wasn't i did not think twice about that. >> i currently work as cadet inform the san francisco sheriff's department i've been surprised 0 work within criminal justice system field i had an opportunity to grow within that career path. >> as i got into the department and through the years of problems and everything else that means a lot i can represent women and in order to make that change how people view us as a very important part of the vice president you have topanga you have to the first foot chase through the fight are you cable of getting that person whether large or small into captivity that is the test at times. >> as an agent worked

undercover and prevent external and internal loss to the company it was basically like detective work but through the company from that experience and the people that i worked around law enforcement that gave me an action when i came to be a cadet i saw i was exploded to more people and the security he was able to build on that. >> unfortunately, we have a lot of women retire to recruiting right now is critical for us we gotten too low faster the percentage of women in the department and us connecting with the community trying to get people to realize this job is definitely for them our community relations group is out attempt all the time. >> in other words, to grow in the fields he capitalized any

education and got my bachelors degree so i can current work at city hall i provide security for the front of the building and people are entering entering but within any security or control within the building and checking personal bags is having a awareness of the surrounded. >> there is so month people the brunet of breaking into this career that was every for easier for me had an on the with an before he cleared the path for laugh us. >> my people he actually looking at lucid up to poem like he joe and kim and merit made they're on the streets working redondo hard their cable of doing this job and textbook took the time to bring us along.

>> women have going after their goals and departments line the san francisco sheriff's department provide a lot of training tools and inspiring you to go into the department. >> they gave me any work ethics she spider me to do whatever he wanted to do and work hard at the intersection. >> if you're going to make change you have to be part of change and becoming law enforcement i wanted to show women could do this job it is hard not easy. >> finds something our compassion about and follow roll models and the gets the necessary skeletals to get to that goal with education and sprirmz whatever gets you there. >> if this is what you want to

do dream big and actually do what you desire to do and you can go vertebrae far it is a fast job i wouldn't do anything else. >> ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ it. >> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges resident to do their shop & dine in the 49 within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services in the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so we're will you shop & dine in the 49 chinatown has to be one the best unique shopping areas in san francisco that is color fulfill

and safe each vegetation and seafood and find everything in chinatown the walk shop in chinatown welcome to jason dessert i'm the fifth generation of candy in san francisco still that serves 2000 district in the chinatown in the past it was the tradition and my family was the royal chef in the pot pals that's why we learned this stuff and moved from here to have dragon candy i want people to know that is art we will explain a walk and they can't walk in and out it is different techniques from stir frying to smoking to steaming

and they do show of. >> beer a royalty for the age berry up to now not people know that especially the toughest they think this is - i really appreciate they love this art. >> from the cantonese to the hypomania and we have hot pots we have all of the cuisines of china in our chinatown you don't have to go far. >> small business is important to our neighborhood because if we really make a lot of people lives better more people get a job here not just a big firm. >> you don't have to go anywhere else we have pocketed of great neighborhoods haul have all have their own uniqueness.

san francisco is surrounded on three sides by water, the fire boat station is intergal to maritime rescue and preparedness, not only for san francisco, but for all of the bay area. [sirens] >> fire station 35 was built in 1915. so it is over 100 years old. and helped it, we're going to build fire boat station 35. >> so the finished capital planning committee, i think about three years ago, issued a guidance that all city facilities must exist on sea level rise. >> the station 35, construction cost is

approximately $30 million. and the schedule was complicated because of what you call a float. it is being fabricated in china, and will be brought to treasure island, where the building site efficient will be constructed on top of it, and then brought to pier 22 and a half for installation. >> we're looking at late 2020 for final completion of the fire boat float. the historic firehouse will remain on the embarcadero, and we will still respond out of the historic firehouse with our fire engine, and respond to medical calls and other incidences in the district. >> this totally has to incorporate between three to six feet of sea level rise over the next 100 years. that's what the city's guidance is requiring. it is built on the float,

that can move up and down as the water level rises, and sits on four fixed guide piles. so if the seas go up, it can move up and down with that. >> it does have a full range of travel, from low tide to high tide of about 16 feet. so that allows for current tidal movements and sea lisle rises in the coming decades. >> the fire boat station float will also incorporate a ramp for ambulance deployment and access. >> the access ramp is rigidly connected to the land side, with more of a pivot or hinge connection, and then it is sliding over the top of the float. in that way the ramp can flex up and down like a hinge, and also allow for a slight few inches of lateral motion of the float. both the access ramps, which there is two, and

the utility's only flexible connection connecting from the float to the back of the building. so electrical power, water, sewage, it all has flexible connection to the boat. >> high boat station number 35 will provide mooring for three fire boats and one rescue boat. >> currently we're staffed with seven members per day, but the fire department would like to establish a new dedicated marine unit that would be able to respond to multiple incidences. looking into the future, we have not only at&t park, where we have a lot of kayakers, but we have a lot of developments in the southeast side, including the stadium, and we want to have the ability to respond to any marine or maritime incident along these new developments. >> there are very few designs for people

sleeping on the water. we're looking at cruiseships, which are larger structures, several times the size of harbor station 35, but they're the only good reference point. we look to the cruiseship industry who has kind of an index for how much acceleration they were accommodate. >> it is very unique. i don't know that any other fire station built on the water is in the united states. >> the fire boat is a regional asset that can be used for water rescue, but we also do environmental cleanup. we have special rigging that we carry that will contain oil spills until an environmental unit can come out. this is a job for us, but it is also a way of life and a lifestyle. we're proud to serve our community. and we're willing to help

>> good afternoon this. meeting will come to order. welcome to the december 6, 2021 regular meeting of the land use and transport committee. i am the chair. joined by vice chair preston and supervisor peskin. the committee clerk is erica major. i would like to acknowledge and thank the staff at sfgovtv for staffing this meeting. do we have any announcements? >> yes, thank you, madam chair. the minutes will reflect committee members participated through video. the board recognizes public access is essential and invite public participation in the following ways. public comment is available on each item t.channel 26, 78 or 99

everything the call-in number is on the screen. each speaker is allowed two minutes. comments to speak are available by calling 415-655-0001. the meeting id is 24922772587. press pound and pound again. when you are connected you will hear the meeting discussions. you will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. best practices call from quiet location, state clearly and

slowly. turn down your television or radio. you may submit public comment by e-mail to the land use and transportation clerk at sfgovtv. if you submit public comment via e-mail will be made part of the official file. comments may be sent to city hall. items acted upon today will appear on the december 14th, 2021 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you very much, madam clerk. call item 1. ordinance amending the planning code to revise massage establishment zoning controls including among other things add

sole practitioner massage establishments to the definition of health and services. call 415-655-0001. press pound twice. if you have not done so press star 3 to line up to speak. the system will indicate you have raised you're hand in confirmation. madam chair. >> thank you. colleagues we heard this item last week. there were substantive amendments. we are hearing it again today. we are not going to have a full presentation. i would give an opportunity to amy from supervisor ronan's office to make some remarks. welcome. >> thank you, chair melgar, for making time to hear this item today. legislative aid to supervisor sr

ronen. the amended version was distributed via e-mail this morning. the change is on page 10 line 18 within version of not a residential hotel. on behalf of supervisor ronen i ask you accept the amendment and forward the file to the full board as committee report. we are also requesting that the file be duplicated, you consider additional amendments today, also that were distributed to you earlier. if you accept those as duplicated file continue to the call of the chair. it will be referred to the planning commission before returning to this committee. the amendments proposed today to duplicated file will add accessory to health services as an exception to the massage use

in the current version as exception for accessory to personal services. personal service was added following a recommendation by planning staff and the commission. we believe allowing massage accessory to health services like chiropractic and acupuncture is practical and reasonable. i am available for questions. very on necan flores is also here from planning. >> thank you. we are going to do the non substantive amendment to what we have today to take public comment. we will duplicate the file and amend that duplicated file with substantive amendments and we will continue that to the call of the chair. >> that is perfect. >> colleagues do we have any questions or comments for either?

okay. with that, madam clerk, public comment on this item, please. >> we are checking for callers in the queue. please press star 3 to be added the queue. you only need to press once. on hold please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. we have eight listeners, zero in the queue. >> public comment is closed. supervisor peskin did you want to make the amendment? >> i would be happy to make the amendment. subsequently to duplicate the file and continue the duplicated file to the call of the chair. i can make that all-in-one motion if it pleases you or two motions if you so desire.

>> yes. >> we have to take motions separately because of the remote meeting. >> i move the amendment that we are in receipt of and that she just spoke to. thank you to supervisor ronen and the city attorney, ms. long, for accommodating my one suggestion from last week. >> the motion as stated supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> then i would duplicate the file and ask that the duplicated file be continued to the call of the chair. we have to amend the file. >> excuse me. i did that in rules committee this morning. i would like to amend the duplicated file as discussed

buyer ms. fine heart. i will make that motion. i would like to continue to the call of the chair. >> supervisor peskin requested to duplicate the original file. on the motion to amend the duplicate. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. on the motion to continue the duplicate as amended, requested by supervisor or moved by supervisor peskin. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> sorry. so we are clear. this motion is to continue to call of the chair. we haven't moved it through the committee report. >> on the duplicate to continue as amended to the call of the

chair supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. on the remaining balance for the original. the last motion was to amend. >> i will make a motion to send the amended file original file 210381 as amended with recommendation to the board of supervisors as a committee report. >> all right. what he said. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> thank you so much. madam clerk, please call item 2. >> item 2. ordinance amending the public works code to limit administrative objections. to require plant replacement

trees within 120 days every move. require tree protection plans include acknowledgment and findings. members who wish to comment on item 2 call the number on the screen. 415-655-0001. id24922772587. press pound pound. if you have not done so press star 3 to line up to speak. the system will indicate you have raised your hands in in confirmation. >> thank you very much, madam clerk. we are joined by supervisor safai who is a sponsor of this legislation. welcome, supervisor safai. >> this is lauren chong legislative aid to supervisor safai. he is having trouble getting on the call. would it be possible to move to

a different item and come back in. >> it is possible, however, the next two items are together. it is a hearing. we are going to move to that. please let the supervisor know it is going to be awhile. >> thank you. >> let's do that. >> madam chair i was able to get on. i am sorry. >> welcome, supervisor. >> did you read the item? are we ready to go. >> we are ready for remarks. we have carla short here from staff on stand by for any questions. we wanted to hear about the legislation. >> essentially, what this legislation is and i appreciate supervisor peskin for working

with me dealing with some of the advocates. essentially what we have done here is tried to ensure that the fine process that happens with regard to illegal tree removal has increased to a penalty more of a deterrent. what we have seen in the past has been people have just looked at this as something that they factor into the development process. they can factor in the cost of what damaging a tree can be. in the end they may being a decision to do that. something that we wanted to get right. the board of appels elevated this issue after they conducted numerous hearings for appeals of tree removal orders issued by public works department. what we tried to do is through two meetings through the board of appels, the conclusion was reached by the board of appels

and bureau of for restree they would come up with edge regulatory framework. they didn't provide sufficient deterrents for illegal tree removal. as you all know and you have heard me say this and many of you agree trees are such an important part of our collective landscape here in san francisco our effort to combat climate change. personally we have focused a lot of energy on planting trees in district 11. we planted over 2000 trees in our city over the last few years. without that our urban canopy would have dropped. since the last time this legislation was heard in committee we met with advocates. thank you, supervisor peskin. we are going to ensure that

there still would be the ability for people to weigh in because advocates felt like removing the appeals process under hazard trees would harm the public ability to participate. for those reasons we have a few amendments today. i propose the following amendment. page one line 3-4 eliminate objectives to removal of tree. page 2 line 8 and 9 strike or if win 15 days of giving notice for removal of hazard tree. on page 2 line 9-10 or within 15 days after giving removal of hazard tree under subsection a4. page 7 line 10 strike tree on

private property or a tree on property. at the end this legislation will include mandate for public works to replace street trees removed by department in the same location with the 120 days much removal. it will includes removed by private party without obtaining permit from department. would require in addition to add enough penalties responsible party plant replacement tree same or greater in diameter every moved tree. retrier protection plan includes arborist estimate. there are trees they are concerned would be impacted by development they have to hire a certified arborist for all trees covered by the plan and the applicanting acknowledgment if

the tree is injured or destroyed. revise penalties for destroys o removing. the $10,000 replacement value whichever is greater. $20,000 or double replacement value for violations after the first. that is my opening statement. issues that i wanted to cover with you today, madam chair and rest of the committee members. if committee members have questions for chris from the public works as well as interim director carla short is here as you have stated. thank you. >> thank you very much, supervisor safai. any questions or concerns? for the supervisor or staff on this item? >> well then madam clerk go to

public comment on this item, please. >> we have joe assisting the public comment line. checking on callers in the queue. if you would like to speak to item 2 press star 3. it will add you to our system. please waits until the system indicates you are unmuted we will unnatural you. joe says we have 15 listeners. if you can unmute the first caller, please. joe. >> hi. this is adam from district 6. i apologize for not having read through the suggested legislation. i didn't see anything in the supporting documents online. for supervisor safai i am curious if this legislation has any enforcement for city departments. i am asking specifically in regards to the issues on fourth

street and soma where the central subway project has come in. the contractors removed almost all of the street trees on fourth street between where the line comes up and where it ends. as we know, lack of trees is a very poor thing to have in an urban environment especially around the freeway. trees generate clean air, shade. we do have navigation center around here, a lot of unhoused folks who definitely could benefit from trees in the shade as well as residents living in the area. attempts to replace local trees attorney out for convenience hit

a brick will. this is a great idea. i would love to make sure there are provisions for enforcements against city departments and not just private contractors. we need trees. we don't want to live in a concrete jungle. thanks. >> thank you so much. next speaker, please. >> i lost contact.

>> that was the last caller in the queue. >> public comment is now closed. colleagues. does somebody want to move the amendment as stated by supervisor safai. >> madam chair, there are more callers that popped up. is it okay to take those? >> yes, please. >> we will take the next caller, please. >> i am here for number three. >> where there is item 2. public works code ordinance about tree planting and removal. if you are on the public comment line for that item stay in the queue. if you are not calling for number 2 for tree planting. press star 3 and it will take you out of the queue.

it looks like we have 20 listeners with four in queue. if you are on the line for item 2 stay in the queue. next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. catherine howard with sierra club. thank you very much for removing the clause eliminating the public right to file administrative objection to tree removal. also, thank you for taking out language in 809 on trees on private property as we requested. just to explain the reason we requested this deletion is that the legislation is titled public works code street tree planting and removal. adding a simple phrase tree on private property extending to

autrys. this could results in unwelcome of invasion of public property. there was nothing in the legislative deep guest about extending d.p.w. jurisdiction to trees completely on private property and not threatening sidewalks or the right-of-way. therefore we appreciate very much the removal of this language from the legislation. i want to say to the supervisors thank you so much for your efforts on behalf of our urban forest. >> next speaker, please. >> thank you. josh clip. the city is planting less than half of the trees needed for urban forest. this means communities that are poor and people of color will continue to have less canopy. there needs to be planting requirement that requires

equitable canopy planting until there is tree equity. there needs protection for healthy backyard trees which is an aspect of the san francisco urban forest not in street trees but that does need to happen. additionally all over california cities are required to post bond to ensure trees are not damaged or removed. san francisco there is no such requirement it is into the cost of business. the board of appeals sent a letter to the board of supervisors for this. we need more enforcement ability. our city should be able to do what is due to the city. one-to-one replacements not enough. we are looking down climate chair and ecosystem collapse. it is not enough. we need replacement to take the trees, climate and ecosystem

values into account. thank you. >> next speaker, please. we have three in queue. >> i wondered if you receive my slides and if you could show them please. >> victor, we have mr. carnes on the line that submitted a powerpoint presentation. let's pull that up. >> one moment. my apologies, wrong one. >> that is the correct one.

>> it was my host screen. you have two minutes beginning now. >> thank you. i am lance carnes. the matter before you. it is hard to hear this committee. the 16 rule regarding full notice for hazard tree removals. next slide please. there is a lesson on practice by

d.p.w. f24 hour emergency removals. 24 hour emergency removals are not part of article 16. they were invented in the spring of 2019. on is slide you will see two 24 hour removals still standing after 15 to 17 months. this is an example of the 24 hour emergency remove notification. this notice cannot be protested. these are not shown online with other removal posting. you have to stand next to the tree to see the posting in violation of access rights for disabled people. no date on the notice. 24 hours from when? these postings make up two-thirds or more of all removal postings.

in other words for every 100 trees for removal 67 are 24 hour emergency removal notification. the public has no knowledge of. >> supervisors please halt the notices a backdoor way of gets around the 30 and 15 day protest hearings. thank you. >> next speaker. >> i am john no -- nolte. d.p.w. are removing trees and not lay letting the public know this is happening.

also not stating why they have been removed. also there is no way to protest them. also there is no way to know the date that the trees were posted. they cannot be repealed because they consider these as hazard trees. this is happening all across the city and specifically also in the civic center area. why are you taking out mature trees and there is no timeline to put back the trees that they have taken out. this legislation is good in the part to go backwards to help deal with trees they had taken out. next is the issue what is the issue of other city departments that are taking out trees or planting trees and are using article 16 but they are in this case two departments that i am

concerned about. that is s.f.m.t.a. and sfpuc starting their own hearing process to circumvent this buf jurisdiction on street trees. i would think we should put something in motion for the change a little bit of this article 16 to help deal with these two other departments in the appeal process which there is clearly no appeal process. thank you very much for your time. >> madam chair, that was the last caller in the queue. >> thank you, madam clerk. public comment is now closed. colleagues. supervisor safai. do you have something to add? >> i just want to collect a few things for the record. one of the reasons why we put in

the legislation mandating the city to replace any trees that it removed was exactly for the reason some of the callers stated because the city was involved in having these conversations. that is in the legislation. second thing to correct the record. we cannish leins when we put on pam penalties leins are issued. we are 100%, chair melgar and i had these conversations. we are concerned about equity in the distribution and planting of trees and protection of trees. it is one of the reasons i came into office with a mandate and made it a top priority to plant over 2000 trees in an area of the city that has the highest diversity of any other part of san francisco. to ensure that there is access

to the wonderful canopy environment that is part of san francisco. we are trying our best to achieve some of that here. the other thing is unfortunately folks, and i have witnessed it myself. we have trees that are hazardous and can cause significant damage to the health and safety of our citizens. i can tell you, two winters ago there was a debate in the city about our ficus. we made the decision for every commercial corridor to plant ficus. what we didn't do is create enough of a base for the roots of the trees. what happens they become extremely top-heavy and if they don't have the proper space for roots to grow, they topple. i can tell you i witnessed

myself a beautiful ficus. fully mature in supervisor peskin's district. topple on fillmore street and luckily damage a couple cars. luckily no one was killed or injured. we have to retain the ability to have an emergency removal process. we compromised here the prior to covid hazardous noticing was never put online. prior to that we did not see many appeals. now that they are online, they are literally appealed by the same person every single time. in some of those cases i think 7 or 8, they compromised, fell, putting health and safety of public at risk. we believe this is the appropriate compromise.

thank you, supervisor peskin, for working with me. we got many advocates in the room. thank you, department of public works, carla short and her team. thank you, josh. he is not happy with the outcome. thank you for your input, mr. cliff, and others. i believe supervisor mandelman has intention of duplicating the file. he has the intention of a further conversation about trees on private property. appreciate the time today. i know you have a full agenda. i wanted to thank everyone involved for working on this, spreadses of urban for -- friends of urban forestry gave us good input and advice. thank you. i think this is going to help

our canopy expand and protect trees in the city we all care about. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you, supervisor safai. i understand that we have one more caller who wants to weigh in on this topic. i will re-open the public comment to let that person speak if they are still with us. madam clerk is that public commenter still with us. >> yes. this is the third call for public comment on number 2. street planting and removal ordinance. last caller. >> this is michael nolte, district 6. >> you spoke already for item 2.

it is only two minutes per sunshine. thank you so much. >> thank you, madam clerk. supervisor safai. i have not receive a request from supervisor mandelman to duplicate the file. we will deal with that. supervisor peskin. >> you are muted. >> that is what happens. computer difficulties resolved for now. let me thank supervisor safai as well as supervisor mandelman for cosponsoring hearings, two of them that we had on the urban forest canopy, which i think resulted in a number of suggestions and i want to thank

supervisor safai for holding off on this legislation until we have those hearings and appreciate the fact that he has worked with and listened to members of the public relative to the amendments that he has offered which i am happy to move. with those amendments adopt cosponsor this legislation. >> thank you very much, supervisor. >> add me as well as cosponsor. i want to take a moment to be grateful and hold up the work of carla short. i appreciate you. this last month when we had district 7 trees being a total mess, i was so grateful for your quick response to the threats of

our residents who were really scared from our street trees that were leaning and branches broken and all of these things happening. i am grateful for supervisor safai's work to do that balancing. doing what we need to do at the same time as we provide transparency and communication with the public on the environment. an aye for equity. many of our residents who don't live in wealthy areas do not have a canopy but other districts do. mr. buck did you want to say something? >> you are muted. >> thank you, board members. a point of clarification. the previous caller is a brother

of john nolte. if there is a chance to do that. >> wait. that is my mistake. >> we will pull it up. >> let's bring in mr. nolte, please, if he wants to weigh in. thank you. >> take that caller. i apologize. >> thank you. this is michael nolte. executive 6 executive director. one of the neighborhoods with one of the least district 6 areas with one of the least set of trees. we are experiencing a lot of trees being cut down by various city departments. m.t.a. is trying to do stuff

along market street. around the removal -- the shelters that are around bart. there the other departments doing various things. there needs to be more clear process about the trees removed. i think obviously more legislation has to be created. i was dismayed buyer the first caller talking about the central subway and how the contractor has removed many trees on fourth street. again, these are contractors that basically are not necessarily going by what we would assume as public members find acceptable. you know, the contractors sometimes they don't protect the trees during their construction

and we lose trees right and left. sometimes there is really no consequence. there seems to be a lot of different issues at play. we do appreciate hearing this one step being talked about now but there seems to be further steps that advocates have been trying to address in the flawed system that is currently in play. along with permitting as well as the various other issues that we see that are not necessarily being done appropriately. thank you for your time. >> i apologize for my overzealousness with my notes there. i referred to them incorrectly. that confirms that is the last person in the queue. >> with that public comment is now closed.

thank you so much, madam clerk for making sure everyone's voice is heard. supervisor peskin, did you make a motion? you did. >> to adopt the amendments. >> madam clerk. lets take roll for that motion. >> on the motion as stated by supervisor peskin. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> thank you. now can we have a motion to move this forward as amendment. >> so moved. >> on the motion as stated supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes.

thank you so much. that motion passes. >> please call item 3 and 4 together. >> 3. resolution urging permitties of san francisco bicycle share and powered scooter share program to implement mesh thursdaysures goes to advance rider compliance with existing terms and conditions of san francisco's bicycle share and powered scooter share program. 4. hearing to address noncompliance by shared mobility device permittees and riders of shared mobility devices with laws and regulations designed to protect the health and safety riders and pedestrians, including families, seniors and people with disabilities and requesting the municipal transportation agency and shared mobility device

permittees to report. call 415-655-0001 to speak. >> thank you, supervisor peskin for introducing this item and your hard work on this issue. i have a special place in my heart for all issues regarding mobility and accessibility. so that we have a city where everyone can get around and everyone can contribute. i am grateful supervisor peskin that you are doing this. i appreciate you. the floor is yours. >> thank you, madam chair and thank you for scheduling this hearing as well as the related item. the resolution that is on the calendar. i am going to ask ms. bracket to please turn her camera off until we get to her in the presentation. i thought i would just start by

taking this off with a walk down memory lane from not very long ago to explain how we got to this part of the micro mobility world and remind us of the bumps along the way and provide goals for what we would like to achieve with this hearing and colleagues, feel free to jump in. it wasn't that long ago back in 2017 when we actually introduced legislation for the regulation of untethered bike share mocromobility use as some of my longer term members of this board will remember. fast forward a year later, we proposed very similar legislation for a new emerging

mocromobility devices electric scooters and actually we did that then with the enthusiastic support of the then director of the s.f.m.t.a. ed riskin. while that legislation to give the s.f.m.t.a. ability to enter into licensing of scooter companies and issuing of permits with conditions. scooter get on let lose. the number one but only offender dumped thousands of scooters knowing that that legislation was pending. that they would soon be regulated. one of the things i know we don't remember mamohammed nuru

he drove around with d.p.w. trucks and confiscated dozens of scooters to put in the back of d.p.w. trucks. ultimately, we did pass that legislation. the m ta got into the business of permitting scooter share in san francisco, which was already becoming the standard in other jurisdictions. not only in california but across the country. there has been some evolution since then. i think kate from the m ta can tell us about that. bird did not get a license if my recollection is lights. lime turned around and sued the

city because they did not win a permit. maybe we can get additional history on that. i think the hearing today should touch on a number of things. number one, what the permit conditions are, if they are add hearing to those conditions if these devices are equitably deployed around be the city relative to what supervisor melgar just brought up which is the issue of access for people throughout the city. then the thing that was impetus for this hearing which has to do with persistent safety concerns, particularly as it regards not only sidewalk riding but also sidewalk parking. it is not lost on me that we have regulated this emerging

industry in ways we have been deprived of relative to shared automobile trips by companies like uber and lyft, both who are in the micro mobility outfit because both of those companies have managed to get preemption that prevents local governments from doing what is right for public health and safety concerns. we have also made collaborative strides in the industry. including when the m ta broadly required fix to the illegal parking. they met that regulation within novation. now the lock mechanisms on the devices is a standard. in the past months getting to the issue that i am particularly concerned about which is safety. there have been a number of

injuries involving not only riders of scooters but pedestrians including high profile horrible injury to of all people the director of the mayor's office of disability who was actually in her wheelchair not far from city hall when a sidewalk scooter rider struck her and shattered her ankle and has left her hospitalized for a long time. i am sorry for her and her recovery is expected to take several more months of intense e care. we have asked for and received data from the san francisco department of public health tracks scooter injuries at san francisco general that suggest that these are not isolated incidents. i have that report here and would actually like to if i can

find it read some words that i was not happy to read which is in 2018 san francisco general began tracking injuries associated with use of standing electric scooters following increased use of devices. these are presently included within the pedestrian category of injury surveillance. a detailed analysis from the scooter companies police reports and san francisco general tracking conducted during the scooter pilot is available. five severe requiring hospitalization admissions. scooter related injuries. four were critical. these do not include fails injuries for the first time in 2020 two riders died in san

francisco taken together these indicate emerging mode may be particularly vulnerable to injury. no surprise there. getting on to my presentation. frankly, i want to talk about how people report and whether it is underreported. i have one individual in my district who is responsible probably for the lion's share of some 2000 complaints. colleagues we are all on his e-mails. i want to dig further into whether or not it is under reported. i believe that it is. it is actually quite challenging to report illegal riding barrier. i want to dig into that problem this afternoon. in the interest of expediting a solution to the issue of

sidewalk riding which based on the demonstration i attended with the m ta last week. i thank kate and her team. i believe it is very possible to implement the scooter companies now have the technology and i would like to actually amend the subject resolution to urge the m ta not to issue new permits until or unless the scooter companies have implemented this technology on all of their devices. we will hear more about that demonstration that i personally attended. i want to thank my staff for bottom lining this in my office. before turning it over to the s.f.m.t.a. i will reiterate what i want out of this implement sidewalk detection as soon as possible. second better understand how to

go about enforcement of violations. third i would like to explore an idea kicking around at the state level. a notion each of the companies include liability waivers in their contracts with the riders. i think that deserves some exploration. before as you know you can get on a scooter they have to waive any claim against the companies themselves. we are in receipt of a letter from the companies not surprisingly they don't like that idea. i think this is something that many if not most riders don't realize as they click through the various screens to obtain the device. i think if that dynamic were different we would see companies a lot more proactive about safety controls. with that summary, i will turn

it over to s.f.m.t.a. and director and her staff for their presentation which i reviewed a draft of last week. i also want to remind m.t.a. and when we met last week originally it was not only then mayor lee's appreciation and embracing of all things tech but it was a representation by the m ta that all transportation was good transportation and this was a potentially very good first mile, last mile solution. i would like to definitely into it a little bit whether or not that is true, whether or not it these devices have helped

de-congest san francisco, who uses them. in my district where at least pre-pandemic and now slowly as we emerge from the pandemic where we have a large amount of san francisco tourist industry, a lot of rides are joyrides. they are not a first-last mile solution. they are a fun device which i am down with as long as they are not on our sidewalks. those riders aren't getting traumatic brain injuries. we would love to hear about that from the m ta. thank you, colleagues for indulging me for that extremely long introduction to this hearing.

>> welcome. >> thank you for the introduction. kate 2009 director of taxis, access and mobility services for s.f.m.t.a. thank you for inviting us today. i want to thank chair melgar, supervisor peskin for creating this opportunity for us to be held accountable to you and to the public. we share your concerns. we have a lengthy presentation. i am trying to answer and provide helpful information. i want to particularly thank supervisor peskin for his leadership in this area. we work with him monthly, weekly, sometimes daily. he is very accessible to us and helpful in providing consistent feedback. this is a team effort. it is not all about me. i represent a larger team. today we have with us phil

cranna enforcement and legal affairs manager. sarah hellman, permits manager, bike share manager and jason hide, senior transportation manager. it is a team effort here. i will kickoff the presentation and discuss some of our scooter share data and my colleague will provide an update on bike share. my colleague sarah hellman will share her screen and share the presentation. i think we are working to get that set up. >> erica, my share screen is grayed out. not allowing me. do i need to sign off and on? >> i will sign you on the long long list. one moment.

>> we essential have a lot today. i want to start with the desired outcomes or promises of these shared mobility services. there are a lot of exciting promises and opportunities that these services do signal. i will stick with desired outcomes. they can provide safe and equitable mobility option to serve the public interest. they can serve diverse riders, they can support transit by providing first mile-last mile solution. they can help reduce traffic congestion, parking, carbon emissions by offering an active

transportation mode option. as we have seen on our next slide we will get into what some of the challenges are. while there are a lot of potential benefits. they haven't achieved full potential and there are many ongoing challenges which supervisor peskin laid out in great detail which we echo. our biggest concerns relate to illegal and unsafe riding behaviors in addition to sidewalk riding. we have seen double riding, riding the wrong way, improperly parked devices can impact the accessible right-of-way and particularly impact seniors and people with disabilities on the sidewalk. we have seen issues with rider account ability and issues with equitable service where our diverse riders. we don't see being served.

particularly, we think about diversity. we think of race, gender, income, ability status and degraphic. shared mobility services we want to minimize challenges. we have developed a comprehensive regulatory framework to this end. we focus on public safety, consumer protection and equity as our core regulatory goals. on slide 4 and i think supervisor peskin laid this out for us. i will just quickly go through and for those who are interested in the deep history. this slide offers some context for scooter share in san francisco. they were dropped without permits in 2018 and in very

short order the board of supervisors granted m.t.a. authority to permit -- provide permit program for scooter shares. m.t.a. board established the pilot program. we are two permittees in the pilot scoots and skip. we saw complaints we received during the unpermitted deployment or scooter get on. once we had the permit program in place we saw complaints decrease and we saw better more orderly service on the streets. you can see the pictures which show the scooters everywhere. requiring the locking device. maintain an accessible path of

travel. we increased reporting requirements. we required a low income plan. as we moved from the pilot to the permanents program we learned lessons and applied those lessons to the next round of permit issuance. we did the same for this currents round of permits which began in july 2021. next slide. our current program which started on july 1st and goes through the fiscal year june 30, 2022 has three permittees. lines are currently authorized to operate 2000 devices. spin is authorized to operate 2000 devices. scoot authorized to operate 1500 devices. the total maximum allowable

devices in the program is up to 10,000. it is a 10,000 maximum, but in order to achieve increase in the number of devices the permittee needs to first make a request. they can only request increments of 500 every two months. in order to be approved for this increase they have to meet permit terms and conditions. there is a thorough review. there is in this current permits term the option for permitties to be issued a second year under this current permit program if they meet permit terms and conditions. there is a one year option extension. we put some program snapshots to show trips thus far, parking

citations, 311 complaints and moving violations for improper illegal sidewalk riding. those are issued by the sf police department. they have issued five. that represents 68 actual contacts so that there were 63 warnings. five moving violations. sfpd is very well aware of concerns about sidewalk riding and is focusing when they are out there on education and making sure that riders are warned about this behavior. next slide, please. >> if i may through the chair. touch on scoot. they got suspended for a while. can you tell us why. >> sure. under the trier permit terms

scoot was operating subcontract ors. while that is allowable under the permit program they hadn't informed m.t.a. and receive approval. there was a thorough and lengthy investigation process. we issued a heavy fine that. the timing was all a little awkward because it happened to be the end of the last permit term that spanned into the timing for the new permit term or the permit evaluation process. we had to put a pause on making a decision on scoots application for the current permit term while we completed our investigation. we did complete the investigation. they did pay the fine. they were subsequent bely issued a permit under the new program.

>> thank you. as i mentioned the current permit program builds on lessons learned in the pilot and 2019 permit program. m.t.a. has established some new requirements and in some cases updated existing permit requirements to address concerns that we have heard from the public and supervisors. this slide highlights a handful of key requirements. the actual permits have over 70 detailed requirements and six in depth appen diss. i have included the link in the presentation. this is a live link if you want to research any specific permit terms and conditions. the link is here. these are on the m.t.a. website.

we have safety and rider account ability requirements, very detailed parking requirements. which we developed in conjunction with the mayor's office on disability that is a live an link as well. there is a lot of interest in what the parking requirements are. the requirements pertain to both scooter share and bike share. again, we mention that our team does issue citations for improperly parked devices in both scooter share and bike share. we have an equity focus in our requirements. we require an ad adaptive program. low income plans, requirements related to neighborhood distribution and community engagement. there are extensive reporting requirements. harmony is important.

it is very important to the board of supervisors. in this last round of permit applications the relative weight of the labor harmony section was increased so that instead of working 10% of the score it was increased to 15% to reflect importance that the m ta holds this in. there is also a new authority for the director of transportation to suspend a permittee if there is a threat to public health or safety. m.t.a. has a strong and ongoing commitment to disability access and to ensuring that a broad range of users can access the scooter share program. in the last permit term we had

an ad adaptive pilot requirement and in the current permit term that has been upgraded, if you will, to the permanent adaptive program. there is a requirement at least 5% of the permittees fleet is adaptive. the ad adaptive scooters must be available in the app for riders and their reporting requirements. there is also a complimentary program to continue to test and try out different models to see what may work best. this is a very new area, and the disability community is a key stakeholder in letting us know what is working and not working. if we go to the next slide we will see that m.t.a. recently held the demonstration of

adaptive devices. the demonstration was held with access students in the sf unified district and staff. there were many first time scooter riders at the demonstration and it was held in golden gate park. i think it was an exciting time. a lot of first time users trying out the devices annual giving m.t.a. feedback what they liked and didn't like. clear feedback on baskets. people liked baskets. three and four wheel devices with more stability, wider floorboards, feedback related to the ability to change seat heights. that was very positive partnership. thank you. next slide. in addition to the 70 plus permit terms and conditions the

m ta laid out for the permittees, each applicant when they submit their application they have provided us with promises or information on how they would address or would address certain aspects of the program and the applications are part of the permits. the application is actually part of the permit. when we think of the permit it includes m.t.a.'s requirements and promises the permittees made to us. they have all made promises regarding user education, safety messages that pop-up for riders, quizzes that first time riders have to take. they are all required to over a quarterly safety training class.

they all have a progressive discipline model so that the discipline gets passed through to the rider. they have all committed to implementing technology to eliminate sidewalk riding. to that end as supervisor peskin mentioned. we held a sidewalk riding detection demonstration last week. we have been hearing about the technology for some time. we are excited to see the application. we wanted to see it in action. how does this workout in the field and to get the look and feel of what this technology does. we worked to get a permit to close a sidewalk down and had parking control officers posted to maintain a safe environment and we had a number of staff

including we have testing the technology and each permittee uses a different type of technology. we got the range of the various types of technologies that can be used for this purpose. there were some -- while m.t.a. didn't specify specific technology in the application process and part of that is because this is so new. what we said is to the applicants you tell us how to solve this problem. we have these problems, challenges, and how will you solve them? they each proposed various types of solutions. again, we got to test and look and the feel of them. there were some best practices that the staff have coalesced

around. there was an audible no sidewalk message. there were different audible messages or audible techniques used. one was like a beep or buzz. there was another one that said no sidewalk riding, no sidewalk riding. that was very effective. it was relent be less and it really drove the message home. there was a range when the device entered on to the sidewalk. how quickly it slowed down. there are a lot of safety considerations where the permittees don't want it to come to an abrupt stop. there is a gradual slowdown process. the slowdown speed of four miles per hour felt safer and as a rider signaled quickly that this was along with the audible

message that you are not to be riding. you will not be able to ride on the sidewalk. some of the technology we saw was related to gps and mapping. comera -- camera technology and vibration that we tested out. on our next steps we are excited to have tested the technology to see that it is viable and we want to work with the permittees on implements in san francisco that aligns with one of the goals supervisor peskin laid out for us here for one of our outcomes. we want a timeline on when the sidewalk detection technology will be implemented in san francisco. for us we need an audit framework for enforcement to

test out whether the technology is working as promised. m.t.a. will issue an updated policy directive which lays out any new guidance as it related to fleet expansion and permit term extension. specific to sidewalk riding detection technology. m.t.a. has a really top-notch enforcement team. i am proud of the work the team does. we have 8 enforcement staff. generally on the street 7 days per week. authorized to issue penalties for improperly parked devices. over the years we have improved how we do this. currently we have an app that the enforcement team has in the field so when they issue a citation there is an automatic message that goes to the

permittee and requests device removal. the device is required to be removed within two hours. the enforcement app is integrated with 311. there is a lot of interconnection that takes time to builds. as we get more mature in the regulatory program, our tools are getting better. we continue to work to emprove our tools. we have a lot of in addition to on street enforcement there is a lot of compliance monitoring. we monitor various reports and databases and reports that are required to come in monthly and quarterly. we are using technology through sales force to improve how we track reports and are able to report out and so that i am happy to say is working well.

we are improving our efficiencies and integrating with 311 is a new improvement. >> the 8 enforcement staff is not full-time is it? >> they are full-time f.t.e. they do a range of enforcement activities. they are not all dedicated to scooter and bike share enforcement. they enforce on taxi related items and commuter shuttle. this is a portion of their portfolio. with regard to the device removal within two hours. supervisor melgar and supervisor preston will say that my constituents e-mail say this is here day two, day three. a bunch of these things get

thrown into the bay. as you can see the district that i happen to represent has the lion's share of the issuance. you will see them at low tide. sometimes it takes the scooter companies weeks to fish them out of the bay. as a bay swimmer i appreciate that battery acid is going to the bay. the fish i swim with don't like it either. what happens when these are not removed in two hours? >> we do go back to issue citations. we will send the team back out. i am on the e-mails as well. we track and follow and we work with the permittees. there can be additional communication to the permitty,

additional citation. we have added as one of ourmetrics for permit term extension that the permittees need to be responding with in that two hour framework. we have added more teeth to that, if you will. we added a mechanism for us to track that. >> thank you. >> i mentioned transparency and community engagement. we work hard to share with the public what we do. you hardly ever see the enforcement staff. we want to share to the extent we can the good work the team is doing. we included dashboards on our website to show service statistics, number of trips, where the trips are happening,

and then we show complaints and citations. you can map it. if you go to site a user can or somebody who is interested can work for bike share information or just scooter share information. you can select a certain company. you can select a certain timeframe. there is a lot of rich information online that is available. on the next slide. the trips. this is showing us trips happening in the city. they are happening mainly, the trip origin and destination by neighborhood. you can see they track closely where we get the most complaints where we write the most citations. scooters are heavily used in

these neighborhoods in san francisco. trips are an increase over the past number of months. thank you. we also looked at trips by permittee. on the left we have shown each individual permittee. one with most trips 61 percent. spin at 37%. scoot's permit started later as we discussed because of investigation. there is some context there. scoot operates fewer devices than the other permittees. then we looked at the parking citations by permittee so we can track and see how the permittees are doing when we look at

citations relative to trips they provide. lime and spin are closely tracking under .5% of citations as compared to the trips. scoot's number is higher. 1.6%. their denominator is lower. that may impact them. these are various ways to track what is happening with each permittee. i mentioned that the learned lessons from the pilot program, from the first round of permits. now as we are into our second round, the technology is improving, enforcement tools are improving. this is an ongoing conversation, and i would say as great as our enforcement team is and as proud of them as i am and the work

they do. that really the solutions need to come from the permittees. the permittees need to work with their riders on accountability and on systematic solutions to solve the improper riding and parking issues we continue to see. we continue to hear from the community. we do have frequent flyers we hear from frequently and there are a number of very engaged citizens interested in scooters and scooter safety. we continue to engage with supervisor peskin's office and he continues to push us to do better, provide safer, more safety for pedestrians. we take it to heart. there is a lot of work and discussion happening internally. we are working on initiatives that we are considering.

increasing the fine amount for i proper parking. currently $100. per citation. we look to increase to $150 per citation that will take for m.t.a. board approval that is not something at a staff level. we look at standardizing in app safety messages and device markings. some devices are clearly marked on the board or on the stem that say don't go on the sidewalk. some are harder to see. we think the permittees would benefit for guidance and requirements. we have discussed stencils? high complaint areas that would have messages on the walk about no riding on the sidewalk. that is an ongoing conversation. our engineering team has feedback on that. that is utility might not exceed

the cost there. it is something we are looking at. we also have the ability to issue administrative citations if the riders fail to comply with the laws including sidewalk riding. that is something we will do. again, this list might grow. we are going to look at anything we can do to work with the permittees apwork internally to have the safe outcomes that we want. >> i actually have come to note but from my colleagues members of the public watching can you tell us what constitutes proper sidewalk parking versus what constitutes improper sidewalk parking?

>> yes, that is a good question. we will go to the live link. i will summarize. keep going. >> these requirements were gyp rated with the mayor's office on disability. the main policy goal when we they about parking requirements. they can't block accessible path of travel. they can't be hanging over the furniture zone. they have to be locked. there is a locking requirement as you mentioned earlier. they have to be locked.

out of the furniture zone. they have to be out of accessible path of travel. that is a very broad brush. if i missed anything phil can add to that. >> at a higher level. it sounds like you have minimal -- not minimal. one might argue that. minimum requirements and then in the permit process the companies can add additional things that you then incorporate to the terms and conditions of their permit. it sounds like it is not standard across. you set forth the minimal requirements and then if they want to exceed them they can do so. my question is relative to the way penalties are assessed. obviously the penalty that you

assess for various violations is in your regulations. do you know are those paid by the scooter companies, passed through to the customers, users of the scooters? is that a requirement from the m ta or practice of the company. [please stand by]

you you >> the way you described the permit application process is a combination of some very precipitationive requirements and then some policy goals and we ask the applicants to tell us how they would or what their solutions are. so i'll give you an example. under our plan for safe scooter riding and parking in the complication, we ask the applicant describe all education and training that you commit to implementing and then it goes on from there or describe your plan to limit