with everyone. give her a round of applause. on behalf of aaron, derek, thank you to all who joined us, whether here in the theater or virtually online from home. thank you for joining us in this journey towards justice and freedom and to remember and respect and celebrate the legacy of dr. king. so, thank you all again for being with us. and, please, if you have time, go back and look at this again, because it is beautiful. thank you and good night. [ ♪♪♪ ] [applause]

>> there are kids and families ever were. it is really an extraordinary playground. it has got a little something for everyone. it is aesthetically billion. it is completely accessible. you can see how excited people are for this playground. it is very special. >> on opening day in the brand- new helen diller playground at north park, children can be seen swinging, gliding, swinging, exploring, digging, hanging, jumping, and even making drumming sounds. this major renovation was

possible with the generous donation of more than $1.5 million from the mercer fund in honor of san francisco bay area philanthropist helen diller. together with the clean and safe neighborhood parks fund and the city's general fund. >> 4. 3. 2. 1. [applause] >> the playground is broken into three general areas. one for the preschool set, another for older children, and a sand area designed for kids of all ages. unlike the old playground, the new one is accessible to people with disabilities. this brand-new playground has several unique and exciting features. two slides, including one 45- foot super slide with an elevation change of nearly 30 feet. climbing ropes and walls, including one made of granite. 88 suspension bridge.

recycling, traditional swing, plus a therapeutics win for children with disabilities, and even a sand garden with chines and drums. >> it is a visionary $3.5 million world class playground in the heart of san francisco. this is just really a big, community win and a celebration for us all. >> to learn more about the helen diller playground in dolores park, go to sfrecpark.org. . >> secretary: 2022. the meeting is being called to order at 4:32 p.m. the commission of small business. members of the public who will be calling in, the number's (415) 655-0001. access code 24953517176 and

press pound and pound again to be added to the line. which connected, you will hear the meeting discussions, but in listening mode only. before public comment is caused, you'll be added to the skew. and when it's your turn to speak, you'll be prompted to do so. public comment during the meetings limited to three minutes per speaker unless otherwise presided by the speaking officer. sfgov tv please show the small business, office of small business slide. >> president laguana: today, with le begin with the reminder that the small business commission forum is the place to voice your opinions and concerns. the office of small business is the best place to get answers about doing business in san

francisco during the local emergency. if you need assistance with small business matters, particularly at this time, you can find us online and as always, our services are free of charge. before i'd number one ask called, i'd like to start by thanking media services and sfgov tv for recording the live stream and thank you to jonathan for running the meeting. please call item one. >> secretary: item one, call to order and roll call. [roll call] you have a quorum. >> president laguana: great. so i will read the ramaytush ohlone land acknowledgement. the san francisco small business commission and the office of small business staff acknowledges that we are on the

unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush ohlone who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the ramaytush ohlone have never ceded, lost, nor forgot' their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. as guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the ramaytush ohlone and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples. please call item number two. >> secretary: item number two is board of supervisors file 211292 various codes and street vendor regulation.

we have supervisor safai. require permits for vending and authorize enforcement action. amending the provisions of the administrative business and tax regulations, park, and police codes to confirm with those amendments. amending the port code to merge its permit program with the public works permit program repealing reporting provisions from the health code. >> president laguana: welcome supervisor or ivy. i'm not sure which one of you wants to go. >> supervisor, i'm happy to defer to you if you'd like to go over an overview of the legislation. >> supervisor safai: yeah. i'll make some opening remarks and then let you get into the level of specificity to provide some context. >> sure. >> supervisor safai: as many of you know, small business

owners we've been hearing for probably the past year significant conversation around organized retail crime and crime relating to stolen products in general. we started after we had a hearing in spring have started and engaged a kind of working group myself and chief scott chaired that process. many of you saw we passed the legislation that has to do with increase law enforcement and that was our 10a legislation that pertained to allowing the sheriffs to be hired by private entities. we also had an extensive conversation about once items are stolen and if they are, where they end up and how they end up on the streets often in san francisco. chief identified this as a major area of concern. we started the conversation and subsequently the mayor's office also was involved in this

conversation as well and we're drafting legislation as we were so we decided to merge our efforts together and work jointly on this concern. essentially a permitting process that people involved with items on our streets, it stays away from existing areas of concern like food push carts, there's been some misinformation out there that has identified food push carts that would be impacted by this legislation. there's existing code, the department of public health that handles that process. this is really about items and often items that are stolen as we've talked about. people reselling those items without a vending license and bringing greater context in that where the department of

public works in conjunction with potentially other departments would work to enforce and ensure that people that are out there on the streets would be using a vending license or have a vending license. we do write in considerations for those that have economic hardships who would be allowed to hopefully just wave that fee, but we do give some discretion to the head of the clerks to write the implementation and administrative orders on how this would then be applied once we passed the legislation. we think this is necessary. we think this is timely. we think this is a way to ensure integrative magnitude for items in the tool box for those that want to stop the illicit trade of illegal goods on our streets and then also

multiplies criminal activity in and around these environments. i want to thank you ivy lee for her hard work on this and jeffery morris on my team, our city attorney that was involved in drafting this and the state codes that allows for and kind of sets the parameters for on when those goods can be taken and held for. ultimately, if someone does in the have a permit and they're selling items and they cannot produce a vending permit, those items can be confiscated for a short amount of time and then if they're able to produce receipts or pure ownership, they can get those items back. i think that's an important part of the conversation because there needs to be some consequences. i know so many of the small businesses, i know so many

businesses are in the city having to deal with items being tollen and then out on the internet and on the streets. we've provided a mechanism of compliance. i would say supervisor peskin went through a similar, but more refined process as it pertained to fisherman's wharf. i know a lot of the businesses appreciated that and i think we're building off that effort and taking it on the city wide scale and saying to our vendors, many of whom are brick and mortar and many of whom are having their items stolen and we're going to create a mechanism to bring this into compliance. so i'll hand it over to ivy. thank you, ivy. thank you, commissioners, for considering this. welcome to the new katie tang in her new position. i think this is the first time i get to see her in her new

role. so congratulations, director tang, and i look forward to working with all of you. happy to answer any questions after ms. lee speaks. >> president laguana: thank you. ivy, you have the floor. >> thank you so much, president laguana. and thank you, supervisor, for all of your hard work. and really amplifying this issue and for the work of your staffer jeffery who is a pleasure to work with on this. commissioners, thank you for your time. the previous times that ibeen before the small business commission, you know, the commissioners have offered really substantive and thoughtful feedback that has really improved the quality of the legislation that we have managed to ultimately then introduce and pass. i want to actually say that commissioner ortiz-cartagena, i remember working with you on one of the first pieces of legislation which i ever

handled which was the fair chance act that moved the criminal inquiry further in a job in how they interview so that people had an opportunity to be seen as people first rather than a criminal record and, you know, your feedback actually really improved that legislation. so i just want to say that out front because if there are suggestions that commissioners have to improve this legislation and make it work better on the ground versus just in theory, then we are absolutely happy to consider any suggestions that you have. so please don't hesitate to let us know. you are the experts on small business and we want to make sure we take your expertise into consideration. as supervisor safai stated, this legislation really has two objectives. the first is that we try and create a citywide consistent

frame so that folks who want to explore economic opportunities with street vending that they have a legit weight and a simple and streamlined way to do so. the second is that we don't, you know, we want to make sure that folks that are not interested in actually selling goods that they have ownership over -- that we have a way to not criminalize that kind of behavior, but to discourage it with meaningful, but noncriminal consequences. so what this legislation does is that it sets up a permitting process and a regulatory process so that the department of public works would actually govern and come up with regulations and roles for how someone would apply for a permit. the fee schedule for those permits as well as a fee waiver if there's someone who has economic hardship and cannot

pay for a permit. and then scales out so that the department of public works would be able to affiliate with any other city department when it comes to execution of enforcement. so that means that, look, if the department of public works, when they inspect and they ask someone to produce proof of ownership of the goods that they are trying to resell or sell, then it would be very easy for the inspector to say, look, this is your first violation, i'm going to give you a warning first. this is what's required, here's how you apply for a permit and if you don't, i'm going to have to ask you to leave. it is a multi-step process. this is not meant to be punitive. this is meant to be consistent with this idea that we want vibrant street vending. we want vending that makes

sense in public spaces that makes sense. we all know when we have vibrant street scene that's legal and safe that that's actually a benefit for all of us. what we don't want is we don't want what we see and to be playing at u.n. plaza. where we have oversaturation. we have crowds of people that are laying out goods that, you know, still may have the walgreens stickers all over them. that doesn't help any of them and doesn't benefit any of them. one of the other pieces of that that i wanted to emphasize is there's a lot of concern about what this legislation will do. that this is about targeting small immigrants and low income folks really trying to pursue some economic opportunity. that is incorrect. this legislation does not apply to hot dog vendors or people selling tamales from a push

cart. that is not covered by this. this also does not apply to street artist. there is already a street artist regulatory. we want to make sure that people who want to sell goods and prepackaged foods, not prepared foods, that there's a way for them to legit mately pursue a permit and to be able to pursue that economic opportunity. this isn't just a benefit for the city. this is a benefit for those folks who actually want to pursue that economic opportunity because we are hearing from folks for example around 24th and mission, also around 7th and market, for example who actually have what was previously known as a peddler's permit who have gone up to police or contacted our office and said i can't make money and i got a peddler's permit. i followed all the rules and i can't actually do sales here

because i am surrounded by folks who are selling stolen goods. so this is also an effort to make sure that folks who want to pursue this opportunity can safely do so. i'm going to stop there. i know that some of the commissioners may have some questions about how this would work, what this applies to, what this doesn't. so let me just put a pause right here and try to answer any questions that you all might have. >> president laguana: great. commissioners, do we have any questions or comments? commissioner ortiz-cartagena. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena: thank you, supervisor. thank you, ivy. i want to start off, i appreciate you mitigating as much concerns and it is a concern. times are tough right now and you know, what happened in the square with the hot dog and especially in the latino and latina communities, this is a great concern because

traditionally, historically, things like this usually have an unintended consequences. technology barriers that exist and just the way this is culturally so one of the things and i am a formally convicted felon and we worked on the legislation. i wholeheartedly, you do the crime and you do the time. consequences in your actions. i just want to make sure that just down the road, we're no longer supervisors, commissioners, and the spirit and the intent of this legislation is what got him and somebody's peddling 24th and i confiscate your goods. i've got calls from my kids and

nephew and it's not stolen, but i have no receipts. i can't prove ownership of that. culturally in my community, that's what we do. used stuff here and there, we make it happen. and my business concern and community is this eventually becoming punitive. like somehow when we're no longer here. not in the world but, you know, in the positions we hold currently. >> yeah. commissioner, thank you for explaining all of that and describing that and the best intended legislation can often have unintended consequences. i recognize that. i think we all do. of the and so what we are trying to do is to set up a frame work that's narrowly tailored as possible where, for example, when d.p.w. issues regulations on how the permitting will work that there

will be a public commenting period that anyone will be able to submit comments about how to improve what they are proposing. for example, this permitting legislation requires that a part of the permit application, you have to provide identification of who you are. well, we should make it very clear that you can use a foreign passport. you do not have to have, for example, a u.s. passport or a california state id. we should make it as easy as possible for someone to actually meet that requirement which is a reasonable requirement, but the way that you can meet it should be expansive. it should be as low barrier as possible because if you are applying for a street vending permit, then you are trying to do the right thing and we should try to make it as low barrier and says for you to do as possible which also means, we should have the permitting process available in different los angeless. when we do outreach and we have a noticing period, we should

have community organizations working with d.p.w. go out to 24th and mission and let people know in language, hey, in 90 days, this is what's going to start happening. this is the application. is this something that you would want to do, let me help you walk you through it. this is why we're doing it. this is how you can come into compliance, right. so those are just some of the things that we're trying to build in keeping in mind that this is possible. that any time we put a structure in place that someone's going to get hurt and that is not what the intent is. now, as far as punitive. one of the things that i do want to point out is there is a state law that makes it so that we can never impose criminal penalties. for violations of this legislation, you cannot issue an infraction. this could never be a misdemeanor, for example. the maximum penalty that we can do is $100 fine for the first

violation, $200 fine for the second, a maximum of $500 fine for the third and confiscation would only happen for a period of about 90 days where your products would be put into storage and you can go at any time within that 90 day period and retrieve your belongings. so one of the things that you did mention that i do want to talk to you more about and that we will have to flush out is how do you show proof of up. if you go to a thrift store or something that belongs to you already, i don't keep receipts for clothing that i bought my oldest kid, i won't do that. so one of the things that's possible is something that i actually will do the immigration legal work is we should have personal affidavits where you can file an affidavit and present it and say look, these are clothes that i purchased for my child. these are hand me downs and now

i'm selling this clothing. or, for example, the ladies that go to the food pantry, there has to be a way for the food pantry to be able to give them a receipt that shows them this is the food that you received here. i think that we can deal with it. i hope that answers your question, but we can keep talking. >> supervisor safai: yeah, president laguana, i want to add onto that. really appreciate the question, commissioner ortiz-cartagena. that was part of if you heard in my presentation, the mayor's office was working on their own legislation, we were working on ours. we were very clear in our initial statements and this is where the mayor's office and my office were on alignment. we wanted to stay as far away from that as possible.

we knew the implications of that. we also knew that there were existing mechanisms already in place that the department of public health. so when some of the things started to happen in the city where there was some enforcement there, we started to get some calls and i said to people, this has nothing to do with the legislation we've introduced. our legislation hasn't gone through the legislative process yet. so there are existing laws. with regard to this, we are in absolutely dealing with a crisis of and this is from tremendous input and so many different business owners big and small people having items that are stolen that have tried to resell. i think in your instance when someone's out on the streets,

and i also try to think about when policy will be implemented. you're talking about someone from the department of public works coming down. nine times out of ten have a conversation. do you have a permit to sell some of those clothes here in your example? no i don't. i'm sorry, you're going to have to move on. i don't think the clothes or anything gets confiscated. it's more about you don't have a permit. for the people selling stolen goods, that's a different thing because there are a lot of places in this city you and i both know where if you wanted to go down and see where stolen items are resold out on the street, we know exactly where to do and so do the police and people trying to make a change here and i think that's what this is intending to do, but you're very right to say we have to be 100% cognizant of having unintended consequences. >> commissioner

ortiz-cartagena: can i have one suggestion. i think one of the ways that community and also to advocate, right. if somehow trusted c.b.o.s in each district have some kind of authortive say. if they're harassing a merchant like northern mission 24th street would somehow do an affidavit. but if they're involved or they're the registered c.b.o. for a corridor, things would happen a lot faster. we don't have to find out who's in charge of d.p.w. if that's a bureaucratic. if that's registered community partners action on behalf. i think that would kind of eliminate a lot of the unintended consequences. >> president laguana: great. any other commissioners.

vice president zouzounis. >> vice president zouzounis: thank you, supervisor. thank you, ivy for being here and working through this piece of legislation with us. i think i have some questions as well, but i really appreciate the introductions on the legislation and also my fellow commissioners' comments on some of the concerns as we are dealing with some of our most vulnerable communities and our commission especially now that we have taken on the racial equity mandates for the city, racial equity mandate. we are looking at compliance verse punitive approaches and that's paramount for us especially in the last year as we've seen -- last two years as we've seen the city, state, and federal government try to mitigate economic impact on small businesses, independent

contractors, sole proprietors and technical assistance whether it's for filling out a grant. whether it's for filling out a loan, a permit, a waiver, that is something that's consistently missing in the picture and i keep telling you it's my day job in the small business administration, we have seasoned business owners not having business bank accounts. not knowing how to create a p.d.f. and not knowing how to appeal an error made in a timely process just because capacity and technical lot officer technical -- lack of technical assistance, really. so in terms of the intent of this and bringing people into the fold of compliance, i -- the only way that i really see

that intent being carried out is with a strong technical assistance component. so i would like to know, you know, is this going to be something that our official r.t.s going to be issued to pair that outreach because community and business boards are very nongovernmental are very limited in what they can do probono. so if we're asking community groups work force development groups to do this outreach, it needs to be structured into it and there needs to be some as much as possible and i think you're already thinking through that, you know, like, okay what if somebody doesn't have a mailing address. what if someone doesn't have the exact type of document because they don't have any reference points to the type of document that's required.

so as i'm sure the director of the department will be flushing out for criteria for the legislation, i hope there's also going to be like that very specific, it's a prepackaged food product. is it another type of thing. this is the seller's' permit, a receipt, whatever specific type of document is associated with the type of product being sold, that level of specificity needs to be there. i mean, there was different references to the department, you know, sending notifications if anything changed with the program or noticed, you know, to vendors like with waivers,

that sort of thing. so, again, i think this commission will be interested in how that communication or potential businesses happen. this is something our office has been advocating for in general. when we have the point of contacts to these businesses. you know, there's still a lot of brick and mortars that don't really get those updates, right. or like waivers, right. we've seen a lot of schedules that have waivers that are not mentioned on the notices and that when there is outreach, this is about waivers. we've seen that consistently with some of the schedules and permitting schedules. so that communication, a waiver

communication is a big one. yeah. and i think you did say that the fines cap at $500, but in the legislation, there is a reference to a higher amount after three violations and then there's also reference to interest, 10% year for uncollected, that may lead to civic actions and junctions. i'm just curious does that then translate onto peoples' ability to participate in city subsidized programming like housing or something like that. like what material form does that civic action and junction play out. yeah. those are some of the big ones. but i'm sure we'll keep talking for a few minutes and we'll

think of more. >> thank you, vice president zouzounis. so, yes. there are two different schedules. one is for violations of the ordinance. for example, not being able to -- like you have a permit, but you're like i don't have any proof that i own these products, you know, so i'm going to go and get it and i'll receive it and bring it back. does that kind of penalty serve that kind of violation? and then there's the vending without a permit at all. so if there is repeated selling without a permit, then that is the second schedule because it is different, right, in nature than someone who has a permit and like simply doesn't post it or decides like they the requiring like an attestation when you apply for the permit

that says that you will agree for proof of ownership of the goods when asked by an inspector. so that is something they agree to. if you don't produce it, then that's a violation of the ordinance. so, you know, that's why we have two different administrative penalty schemes. one is purely for violations of the legislation for folks that simply do not apply for permit and never try to. who kind of refuse to come into compliance. so the reason why they're the 10% penalty and why you have all this language about a civil action if you do not pay the administrative penalty and fines is because according to the city attorney that when there is an administrative fine

for compliance is that is considered legally a debt to the city. and so unlike the administrative fines for violations for pure violations, not for refusal to comply, you can actually reduce the administrative fines and fees based on your ability to pay. so that is something that someone can actually show and it can be reduced down to 20% of the total fine. for refusal to comply, that is when it would accrue the interest, that is when it would be considered a debt to the city. and according to the city attorney's office, that's something they legally had to include in here. that's part of for example, the port ordinance which is similar to this one and the one we modeled it after. and the last thing i want to tell you commissioners, is i really appreciate your feedback

about the technical assistance. i think that one of the things that we should do is actually have technical assistance grounds that are apart of this not just in city government, but it should be out in community. so if there are community organizations that we know that are in neighborhoods that are already trusted, then why not have them, why not resource them to do the outreach and provide the technical assistance that you're talking about. so that is something we can consider doing. >> president laguana: vice president zouzounis, are you? >> vice president zouzounis: i will leave the floor for now. >> president laguana: okay. commissioner huie. >> commissioner huie: thank you for this legislation as well. i also wanted to just, you know, second and third the need

for outreach in language and culturally competent outreach and also really thinking that this is -- i feel like the more i hear about it or the more we're talking about it, it feels like it's a good kind of gateway opportunity for people to be able to then get hooked up with the technical assistance should that become available. so i like the idea that there's a possibility of opportunity. i'm wondering what are your thoughts about the fee schedule? i know d.p.w. will be governing and administering. do you believe that that should be below after our discussion about low barrier? >> supervisor, please feel free to interrupt me if you ever want the floor. to answer your question, commissioner huie, the fee schedule will be set by d.p.w.

to cover the reasonable cost of the permitting application process, the inspections, and enforcement. they also have to store the items if, you know, confiscation of goods becomes necessary. we really hope that it's not. right, this idea again is to try to bring people into compliance instead of punishing them. but, when they set that fee schedule, we also built in a fee waiver option. so if there is an economic hardship that you should be able to apply at the same time for the fee waiver as you are applying for this permit. if that makes sense. >> commissioner huie: yes, that makes sense. i do think that the amount of the fee will be -- will come into consideration at some point. i mean, for any business, you're weighing scales. like is it worth it? is it not? and if we're not really trying to incentivize people for

creating legitimate businesses, you know, it's the fees could be set to become a barrier. i'm wondering, is there an annual renewal for the program. do people -- so they do need to renew every year. and lastly, i'm wondering, what prevents somebody from having a mixed bag of products. i can come and get a permit with all my legitimate goods and then i have a couple of things that maybe i just came across. how do you prevent that situation? >> that's a great question. and it does not. i mean, there is no way that we have enough inspectors and city staff to actually go out and inspect every single item that every single street vendor is going to be selling. so there is a part of this where i think as supervisor safai said, the reality of how this will be implemented and

enforced is the inspectors and the enforcement will be targeting the very obvious someone is armed and selling three laptops out of their backpack, for example. this is not intended and enforcement is -- the resources that they have for inspection and enforcement are not going to be sufficient to go after every single individual street vendor for everything that they're selling. that is the reality. i do want to make sure to note that, you know, not only does the state law bar us from criminalizing even violations of this ordinance which aligns i think with what the mayor's priority also is. she is not interested in trying to criminalize violations, but, you know, d.p.w., if they need to, for example, in a u.n. plaza kind of situation, if they need to, they can have an

m.o.u. with any other city department to assist with enforcement if they have to. so it has to be meaningful enforcement for it to matter, you know. but at the same time, we do not want police being the first, you know, the first line of defense here. we do not want them having the primary responsibility for enforcing anything related to this legislation. that is not conducive to encouraging people to actually come into compliance. >> commissioner huie: i totally agree. i guess my question is really meant to kind of, you know, give us a moment to kind of think about what would be then the next steps, right. because it's kind of like, if this happens, and then there are people who are getting permits that are selling

legitimate things and then the problem persists and then, you know, i feel like that's how that slippery slope happens is you have one small legislative action and then you have to create more and more legislative actions to kind of like then plug the holes for whatever is happening and i would not want to see 20 other things being presented to try to then solve for the same kind of issue. i don't know if that makes sense. it doesn't seem to make sense. i saw the look on your face. what i'm saying is i know this seems very obvious, but if it doesn't solve for that problem, like if it doesn't solve for it at the end of the day, we're going to still have -- you know, we may get a lot of the people who are really just selling stolen goods and not

really capable of getting a permit and things like that, but should we be talking about organized crime or something much larger, you know, those people are going to have resources to be able to go through your permitting process, get the permits and continue to sell stolen goods. i don't necessarily want to say this on a giant and give anybody ideas or anything, but i'm just trying to be real about what are we -- you know, what percentages is this bucket and what percentage is this bucket and are we really going to be able to fix it with this one thing? does that make anymore sense? >> yeah. i see what you're saying and what i would say is, you know, i think we don't want to make this so expansive at the outset. we don't want to throw this giant net when really what

we're talking about is trying to tailor this to the behavior that i think we all agree is not okay. and so if we need to tweak this, if we need to fine tune it, then we will through the rules and regulations process, that may be necessary as we see it actually happening in reality, but i think the desire right now is to try to make it as narrowly tailored as possible to get folks who want to do the right thing. make it as easy as possible for them to do it and the folks who aren't going to apply for a permit anyway, this is a way to make it very clear and make it very obvious that the city's paying attention and they are going to enforce. so i think that's the best approach where we help the most people that we can with the lightest touch and hurt the fewest. that is what our objective is with this legislation for now.

and if it doesn't work, then, yeah, we have to improve it. we won't know that until it's operational. >> commissioner huie: sure. i totally understand. thank you very much. >> yeah. i mean, i don't know. i guess i'm optimistic and i hope that this doesn't force us, it doesn't force the city to expand and overregulate in this area. that's my hope is that we can set something up that really gives people a chance to really maintain this as an avenue of opportunity and at the same time discourage and try to take away the profitability of bad actors, you know. we'll see if it works. that's what i can -- that's the best that we can do with any legislation i think. >> supervisor safai: i would just add, we know already there was an attempt in fisherman's

wharf, i keep going back to that. there were some problems there, street vendors that were really undermining the businesses that were brick and mortar and i know a lot of you work with brick and mortar businesses. i mean, this is also kind of an extension of that. so we have in place and seen this work already. we know that this -- there is a desire and a need to bring some bad actors in line and i think what would happen in most cases is if this legislation is successful which i really believe it will be, we will put institute a permitting process that will do street vending and the one that is are not and involved in illicit activities are going to move on and if they don't, then we have a mechanism to hold them

accountable and i think that's what's going to happen as ivy said, if there are some things that we haven't thought about, we have the director of public works and the ability to adjust the procedures. there will be some memo randoms of understanding that will be negotiated between the department of public works and other departments they need assistance to work with. there's a lot of opportunity for people to weigh in and ultimately, if someone is being fined multiple times and caught multiple times, you know they're a bad actor whether we increase the penalties from 100 all the way to 500. you know they're involved in some illicit things and there's always the appeal and administrative process to appeal those types of fees and fines and we have to do that. people have to have their due process. all of the ordinances that we

right have to have that, administrative and legal tests that's in place. so there's a lot of mechanisms for people to avail themselves so that we're not being overly punitive. so we really appreciate the feedback today. thank you, commissioners, for all the questions and thoughts and as ivy said, we're open to getting more speed feedback and how we can incorporate some additional ideas if there's room for that. >> president laguana: we still have one or two more commissioners waiting to speak. commissioner huie, are you done? >> commissioner huie: yeah. i'm all done. thank you very much. >> president laguana: okay. vice president zouzounis. >> vice president zouzounis: if anybody else hasn't spoken yet, i'll let them since i've already gone. >> president laguana: go ahead and i'll have -- i just have a brief suggestion. but go ahead, i'll go after

you. >> vice president zouzounis: thanks again for the discussion. in line with this conversation and i think going back to comments we've all made. what are going to be kind of the success metrics for this program or like the accountability tools to make sure as commissioner ortiz-cartagena says, it doesn't become an anti-loitering policy. because as much as brick and mortars, you know, do feel the pain from people who are not paying taxes, permits, and selling things adjacent to them, small brick and mortars and low income communities also are direct victims of anti-loitering laws and we've seen that and we -- and i think that maybe we can also keep in

mind in terms of some of the creativity in this that that might be possible. i know that there are often also good partnerships with vendors and small businesses. you know, there's a tamale man that hangs out in front of my family's store and we have a relationship. maybe, one of the things i think in the legislation was you had to -- you can show proof that you're a representative of a principal business as a means to be in compliance, maybe understanding, you know, what are the variations in that and maybe small businesses can also sponsor street vendors and have some kind of symbiotic relationship there because i hate how we have seen good intended regulations over and over again when it comes into implementation, it turns communities against each other

and it also becomes the city's only legal jurisdiction to solve something is going after the point of sale, right. so that point of sale may not be the person who stole these items, right. that point of sale may not be the person who even knows how to apply for the permit for these items. so i really want us if we're really trying to make this part of systematic change and bringing people fully into compliance with our city's permitting system, then we need to be thinking about like how are we going to be accountable to that goal and how do we make sure that, you know, we're not just putting the brut force only on where the city has legal jurisdiction. maybe we don't have legal jurisdiction online. that means we only have to focus on the people who are on the front end of a scheme that

they might not even know products have been stolen from that they were selling. so we've seen this in practice with legislation very similar to this so this is something i would say if my other commissioners too. you know, as the mayor's office, as the supervisor's office, if you're thinking internally, these metrics may not be in the legislation, but they're part of your management plan of this, we would love to hear that whether that's like -- our goal is to get this amount of businesses, you know, signed up each month or whatever. like we just want to see some accountability tools in it or at least i would love to see that to make sure it's not just another anti-loitering policy that's going to move people from block to block and honestly the stuff on the street is internal market.

people are like picking up stuff that people leave, you know, they're not really a linear supply chain for any of this. so to prove that it does come from linear supply chain almost seems like an impossible burden for a vendor to prove. thank you. >> president laguana: ivy or supervisor. >> supervisor safai: you know, at this point, i think it's good to take the feedback. listen. i don't really have a response to that. we've been on the ground out on the street talking to vendors, talking to the retail community. i've worked on the ground in the tenderloin for almost half my career seeing what happens just was out there just today at u.n. plaza. you just havetor stand there

for a few minutes and see the stolen electronics and items and goods that are there. it's kind of hard to measure where the supply chain comes from and what we're trying to do is to provide a mechanism and we do have mechanisms to allow people to bring themselves into compliance. listen, if you're out there legitimately selling items as an opportunity to start a business, we provide for a waiver for your permitting, we allow you and i think those are the people that are going to want to partake and avail themselves to this program. the people out there doing ill illicit things. what's going on in the bart stations plaza out on our commercial corridors, there's a

lot of illicit activity going on and it's contributing to a climate of that it's okay to be involved in this type of criminal active and i think it undermines the security and the perception of san francisco holding people accountable for illicit activities and so i think this is a real thoughtful way to approach that. this is a very easy not high bar opportunity for people to avail themselves of a permit. so, you know, really appreciate the feedback there and we'll just continue to listen and see how we can work together. i don't know if you want to add anything to that. >> president laguana: no. i have just a couple quick suggestions and then we'll go to public comment. so, you know, i think what i've heard from both the commission

and from you, supervisor, i think there's general agreement and from my view as well, a lot of agreement that folks that are legitimately in business, we should try to make it as easy as possible for them to be able to get up and get running and make that threshold for getting in business be as low as possible and the intent of this legislation is really about preventing the folks that knowingly or unknowingly are receiving stolen goods and by extension making it harder for everybody in the city. other small businesses, our residents, certainly in my industry, we see a lot of broken windows and customers that are very upset, they've lost everything and then it turns up at u.n. el paso

canada, whatever. so my one top level suggestion that i think is consistent with everything that the other commissioners have recommended, and perhaps this is too big an idea or too big a lift for this legislation, so i'm willing to plant this as a seed rather than a formal recommendation. but, you know, i wonder if the city can make an online application that somebody could fill out over the phone and take a picture of their license plate and, you know, fill out an application online, you know, i'm aware of other cities that have done similar online applications that you can do. mobile over the phone. it'd make it easier to provide multilanguage support. it would also make it possible potentially easy for somebody who gets that first initial

warnings. they can walk through the process and be back in business that same day instead of having to go down to city hall and figuring out who to talk to and present the form and get the right language and support it and all this stuff. so my suggestion would just be that, if we could find a way to make a web app that people could easily get to, i think it would make it easier to accomplish addressing a lot of the concerns that we've raised here about equity and language support making it easier for folks to get into business which, of course, is one of our big values here in the commission while at the same time accomplishing the legislation and, you know, there's some benefit that comes from that too because, now somebody's logged on with their phone, there's a little bit more of a paper trail to, if it

does later turn out that they were participating in some sort of criminal network, little less likely that it'd be fraudulent or, you know, they're manipulating forgery or using fake i.d.s and that kind of thing. that was the one idea i had. probably too big for this legislation, but planting seeds. >> thank you so much, president laguana. i really appreciate all of the feedback. i've, you know, i think we have really taken seriously everything that you said and shared with us. we will do our best to share the regulation i think we're in agreement with folks. >> president laguana: with

that, are we can check on public comment. is there any public commentors on the line? jason, are there any public commentors on the line. >> it looks like we have no attendees. >> president laguana: perfect. seeing none. public comment is closed. commissioners, i've heard several different suggestions. i'm inclined to introduce a motion in support of the legislation. i did want to check in with all of you and have a discussion about whether you wanted to incorporate any of these suggestions into a motion. so i will just open the floor up to you guys and, you know, if there's no desire to integrate some of these suggestions into a motion, i'll

make the motion. commissioner ortiz-cartagena. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena: i just want to for the record, i want to support the legislation, i support the work, we have to hold people accountable. i think my biggest suggestion with commissioners, we can somehow incorporate the c.b.o.s in some kind of as i suggested. i don't know exactly, supervisor, how that looks like or wording it. >> supervisor safai: you know what, i think, thank you, commissioner ortiz-cartagena, i think it's a good idea. i think one of the ways, some of the things that i've heard here today are really going to be dealt with as we work with the director of the department of public works to implement the administrative kind of bulletin and you have my commitment. we can ensure that part of the stakeholders and some of the

people that are involved as you say the commercial corridors that you work with like in chinatown, we're talking about chinatown community development corporation, working with community based organizations that work in partnership with small businesses in their area, we can ensure that we work on that as we talk with them about the administration of this program. i don't think we would do that through the legislative process. we would do that through the administrative process, but i think it's a very valid and important piece of the conversation because you want them informed and aware of this and you want them to be involved to ensure that as you said there are any unintended consequences and for those that are legitimate, they know the process by which they can avail themselves by this. thank you. >> president laguana: commissioners, any other feedback? okay.

i will move that the commission supports the legislation. >> commissioner: i'll second. >> president laguana: commissioner huie beat you to the punch. >> secretary: all right. a motion to support this legislation by president laguana. seconded by commissioner huie. i'll read the roll, [roll call] motion passes with a vote of 4-1. >> president laguana: great. thank you so much. >> supervisor safai: thank you, commissioners. thank you for all your thoughtful. >> vice president zouzounis: thank you for all your work on this. >> president laguana: all right. next item, please. >> secretary: item three,

commission president and vice president elections. this is a discussion and action item. the commission will discuss and may take action on the january 2022 to january 2023 term commission president followed by january 2022 to january 2023 term vice president. the. >> president laguana: director, do you want to provide an overview of how this works. >> director: sure. thank you. for the election of both, the president and vice president our commission secretary will call for nominations and we'll begin with the president and then each nomination needs a second. then nominees can make a short statement and the commissioners can also make some comments as well. after that, we'll move to public comment and then our secretary will take the roll call for each nomination in the order that they were nominated. so the commissioners can vote

in favor of one nominee for each office. we'll repeat that process then of for vice president and for both cases, the first nominee to receive four votes is elected. so, with that, i'll turn it back to president laguana. >> president laguana: great. does anybody have any questions about how this works? okay. kerry, would you please call for nominations? >> secretary: are there any nominees for president? >> vice president zouzounis: i would like to nominate commissioner laguana. >> commissioner dickerson: and i want to second it. >> secretary: okay. are there any other nominees?

okay. president laguana, do you want to say a few words. >> president laguana: yeah. i will just say, colleagues, it's an incredible honor to serve with you and work with you. i take this role i take this as a full-time job. maybe not a healthy relationship with the job to be quite honest, but i care very much about each of you and i want to make sure that all of our views are represented and it's been an incredible honor to have this roll. i don't intend to continue this roll indefinitely, but i have felt that i'm learning and i'm thinking i'm learning some

tricks, some new tricks and i'm excited to -- good tricks, not nasty evil tricks, good tricks for the benefit of everybody, so i'm excited to help guide the commission through this year and hopefully we will have two new commissioners soon and they're going to need advice and encouragement from all of us so it's just a real pleasure to work with all of and that was a longer speech than i intended to give. >> secretary: there's no public callers on the line. so i will now call the roll. the motion is to nominate president laguana for the 2022-2023 term as commission president, [roll call]

congratulations. you are the president for the next year. >> president laguana: thank you. thank you all. okay. kerry, would you call for nominees for vice president? >> secretary: yeah. are there nominees for vice president? >> president laguana: it would be my privilege and my honor to nominate vice president zouzounis for another term as vice president. am i allowed to say something or do i just make the motion. i think i just make the motion. >> secretary: is there a

seconder? >> commissioner dickerson: i was trying to get somebody else. i'll second that. can i do that? >> president laguana: yes, you can. >> secretary: all right. vice president zouzounis, do you want to say any words? >> vice president zouzounis: just that i'm very thankful for this commission and all of our members and our staff and leadership and especially how i've seen us grow in the last two years in terms of our know-how to influence city policies and our convictions to make sure that we're bringing equity into the picture at every level. i appreciate that we can have healthy debates and contrarian stances and still, you know, look at what we can do, i mean, even now i think you know we're all in line with the city adopts something, we're going to support how to make it

better for small businesses no matter what our debates were as a forefront and i think that's the attitude that we all bring because we are so hands-on with small business and we reflect that in our work here. so thank you again for trusting me as part of that leadership. >> president laguana: great. i guess i'm supposed to say something here. i'm reading to see what i'm supposed to say. >> secretary: you can either ask if there's any comments or go to public comment? >> president laguana: yeah. i guess i skipped that part. commissioners, i'm glad i skipped it for me. would any commissioners like to comment on the nominee? commissioner huie. >> commissioner huie: i just wanted to sometimes i talk without even unmuting and i get

so eager to speak i guess. i just wanted to thank vice president zouzounis for her work on the racial equity sub committee. i feel like it's a space that we've been able to really dive deeper into some of the issues that, you know, that we talk about at large, but we're still working out how to think about it, how to think about something, how to look at something, how to question something and so, you know, it's very much a work in progress, but it's been a very positive and, you know, forward moving kind of space, so i appreciate that and thank you for your leadership in that. >> president laguana: you know, i'll just add that it has been a real pleasure working

with vice president zouzounis and that the thoughtfulness and attention to detail and personal experience that she brings to bear has been really incredibly helpful not just here, but behind the scenes too as we're analyzing how to move forward. i value her input and her advice and i'm particularly grateful that she feels comfortable disagreeing because this should be a place where we are comfortable saying what we really feel and what we really think and i want that to be -- i don't want people to feel like they have to vote the way everybody else voted just because everybody else voted that way. people should be able to vote what they truly believe and i

think vice president zouzounis is understands that and takes her responsibility seriously and i think it is to this commission's credit that the two of us are able to work together so well and the commission is able to work so well as a body. any other commissioner comments before we go to public comment? okay. is there any public commentors on the line? >> secretary: there's nobody on the line. >> president laguana: didn't quite hear that but i'm going to guess it was a no. seeing none, public comment is closed. kerry, call the role. >> secretary: yeah. all right. to nominate vice president zouzounis for another year of being vice president zouzounis, [roll call]

congratulations. >> vice president zouzounis: thank you for the kind words, everybody. >> president laguana: great. okay. that's out of the way. next item, please. >> secretary: item four, approval of draft meeting minutes. this is an action item. >> president laguana: oh, sorry. before we go to the next item, it says here would the president or vice president like to say a few words. i already said my words. >> secretary: you're right. i'm sorry. i wanted to give vice president zouzounis the opportunity if she wanted to. >> vice president zouzounis: i think i said some words for myself. but i'll just say for president laguana, thank you for your leadership. i mean, you've got us through some of the craziest times we've all experienced and done

it in a way that never felt sloppy. it never felt like we had no beacon, you know, we kept our straight forward path. and you pushed our boundaries in terms of how we can think about supporting small businesses and engaging other parts of the public realm and community and i think that that's been really powerful. it's brought our commission to a higher caliber and that's a testament to your leadership so thank you. >> president laguana: i appreciate that, but of course, it is the work of the entire commission that's got us there and i'm just the person that calls roll and i just raise the chat and it says which person to call next and that's mostly what i do. okay. next item. >> secretary: item four, approval of draft meeting minutes. this is an action item. >> president laguana: i move

to approve the meeting minutes. >> commissioner dickerson: i second it. >> secretary: motion by president laguana, seconded by commissioner dickerson. >> president laguana: shoot. i'm so sorry. we did that out of order. if steven was here, he would have strung me up. so this is the -- we have to open up to public comment first, so is there any public commentors on the line? >> there's nobody on the line. >> president laguana: okay. seeing none, public comment is closed. now i can move that commission accept the minutes. >> commissioner dickerson: and then now i will second it. >> secretary: all right. i will read the roll. [roll call]

all right. meeting minutes are approved 5-0. item five, general public comment. this is a discussion item. >> president laguana: are there any members of the public who would like to make comments about items that are not on today's agenda? >> there's nobody on the line. >> president laguana: okay. seeing none, public comment is closed. next item, please. >> secretary: item six is director's report. this is a discussion item. >> director: all right. first of all, congratulations president laguana and vice president zouzounis on another term. also just wanted to share that we did receive a reappointment memo from the mayor last week for president laguana to continue another term with us here on the commission.

so congratulations. i also wanted to share that starting this week, our office and the office of part of the office of economic and work force economic development will be holding budget sessions and this is an ordinance that was passed several years ago that as a city is embarking upon the budget process and putting together the city's budget proposal that all the city departments must hold community listening sessions, i believe it's a minimum of two and so we are fulfilling our office of small business is fulfilling this requirement through oewd which we are technically a department under this department and so the first listening session will be on january 26th so that's wednesday and that will focus on work force development and then the following day on january 27th, the scene will be

around economic development where the small business community may be interested in participating and sharing ideas and then there's a third meeting in february, on february 10th just to focus on basically what we've heard, so a round-up of the community input and perhaps some draft frame work of what we're thinking about in terms of oewd which includes osd's budget. all of this will be virtual. so it will take place at 6:00 in the evening online and we just today sent out information viaosb letter so the community has the information. next, i just wanted to share an update on the fund. rick from our office has been processing the second round of application. so we received seven applications in the second round. i also wanted to note that all of those who are part of the first round, so there are 70

applications for that round, they automatically apply for the second round. in terms of the legacy business grant program. there are about 180 applications received. so far, that grant program deadline closed on friday. so rick will also be continuing to work through that program as well as the venue fund. and the legacy business plaque. so we're currently in the process of installing about 19 plaques on businesses that have qualified for the industry. so, again, just something fun to look out for when you're going about the city. and we also issued an r.s.p. for a check writer for the venue fund, the legacy business as well as the accessible business entrance program for accessibility. and there were two responsibilities to that r.f.p., so we're in the process of assembling panels to review those proposals.

on the legislative and policy side, just a few quick items to note here. i wanted to share that effective january 1st in terms of the vacancy tax, property owners of commercial store fronts that are empty for more than 182 days could face fines of up to $250 per square feet. and if the space is leased, but still vacant, the tenant would have to pay the penalties. so we're aware that the treasurer's office is going to be doing some outreach. i think i believe it's early next month about this program which i know they'll be lots of interest from this commission as well as the small business community given that last provision i noted. also, in terms of recent announcements, you may have read that for potentially for this november's ballot measure, the mayor is considering a proposal regarding security camera footage and allowing our

police department to monitor security cameras live. and that's under certain conditions that would apply where the sfpd would be able to view that when something is in progress, for example. so the board of supervisors also has another counter proposal and wants the board of supervisors approval in order to monitor security cameras, so just stay tuned for that. those might impact businesses as some of you or other businesses out there may have security cameras. in terms of the state budget proposal, so our commission secretary kerry put together a wonderful summary of some of the initiatives of the governor's recent budget proposal and it's available online and i wanted to make sure that you all are able to reference that and, of course, we'll keep tabs as to what actually makes it through the

budget process. and lastly, i just wanted to share i noticed a lot of interest about the shared spaces program. we're still awaiting for the formal proposal for the mayor's office on that piece and so we'll be sure to schedule that one as we see it come through. this commission is slated to hear the latest on that. so those are my announcements and i'll send it back to you, president laguana. >> president laguana: thank you. director. i sent you an e-mail about a microbusiness program that the state is offering and wanted to flag and let the other commissioners know about this. there is a microgrant that the state of california is offering. the there is a new grant that's going to be opening up soon. san francisco does have to i guess fill out some paper work.

i'm not sure what they have to do. we just got done talking about street vendors and this is a grant program that would seem to pretty squarely help street vendors because you need i think revenue under $50,000 and it's a grant up to 2,500 which sounds like something that would primarily be helping people with small hot dog carts or street sales programs. so commissioner ortiz-cartagena, i know you do a lot of work in this stuff. i wanted to flag this for you and keep an eye out for you. i also wanted to check or flag this again for the director that san francisco does have to take a step or two to get for our residents to get access to

this million dollars. so f.y.i. >> director: thank you and i'm happy to follow up with you or this commission. i am aware of that program. we also need the staffing to administer grants. that is the challenge. so either the city or there's an alternative for the program regulation that it could also be a nonprofit that would apply for it on behalf of the city. so we will sort that out and provide you followup on that. >> president laguana: that'd be great and i was aware of the administrative hurdles and didn't mean to sell those short and i feel like there was one other thing i wanted to ask about, but i can't think of it right now. i didn't see any other commissioners put their name in the chat, but if you have any comments or questions for the

director. if not, li go to public comment. >> there's nobody on the line to speak. >> president laguana: i think he said there's nobody. >> secretary: there's nobody on the line to speak. >> president laguana: okay. got it. seeing none, public comment is closed. next item. >> secretary: item seven, commissioner comments and questions and new business.' this is a discussion item. >> president laguana: commissioners. commissioner ortiz-cartagena. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena: thank you, president laguana. i wanted to bring up some things that i've been experiencing out on the field regarding business registration and i don't know which businesses this applies to, but some businesses i've encountered are not able to renew their registration online. they actually have to download a form and visit the manual

process of calculating their fees and mailing a check along with this form into the office to get their business registered and i was speaking with the director today regarding that and kerry and i just wanted to them know because it becomes really burdensome if you have to first download something printed and then you have to calculate and it's odd because i'vener seen it and i don't know what the reasoning in because these businesses are like veteran businesses that are compliant. so i just wanted to look into that as a commission. >> president laguana: i think we should. we will follow up off line and if it looks like more action is needed, we'll invite t.t.x. or whoever it is we need to invite to come in and talk to us about what's happening and how we can make that work better.

>> commissioner ortiz-cartagena: thank you. >> president laguana: yeah. so two other sort of statewide things i wanted to flag. i know kerry prepared a budget summary. i haven't seen that yet, but i've been doing some statewide work. one is that the state is doing fee waivers for new businesses similar to our first year free program. so when you talk to folks that are thinking about starting a business, it looks like now's a good time. you save at least $100 on filing for a corporation or a limited liability company. the other thing is that the state also has a grant for victims of retail theft and so if you guys as you are going out and talking to the community, if you encounter small business owners that have

been a victim of retail theft, there's also a statewide grant and that's administered by go biz which is the state's business. [please stand by]

but if there is a pattern then i think it may be appropriate to have some conversations with mta about how we can make that work better for everyoneso that this business is art distant disrupted without notice . and that's it,that's all i've got . okay. don't see anybody else so is there any public comment?>> there is no public comment. >> chair: cnnine, public comment is closed. next item please . >> item 8, adjournment. this is an action item.

>> so moved. >> chair: the moveusually happensafter the slide , i think . >> sfgov tv, please show the office of small business slide. >> chair: we will end with a reminder of the small-business commission is the official public forum to voice your opinions and concerns about policies that affect the economic but vitality of businesses in san francisco and theoffice of smallbusiness is the best place to get answers about doing business in san francisco during the local emergency . if you need assistance continue to reach out to theoffice of small business . >> so moved . >> second. >> moved to adjourn by commissioner ortiz, seconded by commissioner zouzounis.

[roll call vote] motion passes 520. meeting is adjourned at 6:0 3 pm. >> chair: tanks everybody. >> 2022.

this is aspecial meeting of the building of inspection commission . i would like to remind everyone to please yourself if you're not speakingand the first item on the agenda is rollcall president mccarthy . [rollcall] i believe he's on the call. can you check, monique? he is in attendance. thank you. commissioner alexander tut. i hear you now. [rollcall] commissioner moss is

excused and wehave a quorum . commissioners, to do read the acknowledgment for today? >> if you could give me one moment. >> no problem. the building inspection commission acknowledges that ancestral land of the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions they have not lost or forgotten their responsibilities as stewards of thisplace as well as for old people who reside in their traditional territories . i guess we recognize we benefit from living and workingon their

traditional homeland . we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors an relatives of the community and affirming their sovereign rights as first first people . >> thank you. for members of the public listening in to today's meetin , the public comment call in number is 415-655-0001 and the access code is 2493 542 0514. to raise your hand press start 3 bite whenprompted by the moderator . and next agenda item is item 2, discussion and possible action on a proposed budget of the department of building inspection for fiscal years 2022, 2023 and 2023 2024.

>> deputy thomas. >> chair: youcan unmute yourself . >> good morning everyone. may i share myscreen ? >> chair: it shouldbe coming shortly now .

>> okay, caneveryone see the first slide ? >> president: yes we can's deputy director for dbi and today is our first budget meeting for fiscal year 22 23 and fiscal year 23 24. today's meeting i'd like to go over some basics and get a financial update about the budget instructions and then our proposed budget with our revenues and our expenditures so let's get started. i'll publicly stop in each section to ask for questions because it may beeasier to answerquestions because we're going to a variety of different subjects until the end . let's get startedwith our budget basics . so here are just some budget basics . this is the year from july to june to july of one year to

june of the following year they city is on a two-year cycle. fiscal year 2624, on the fiscal year 2223 budget was already approved in july with year, two year cycle and it serves for the new budget cycle that we're discussing right now. dbi must hold two of these budget hearings included in the charter and in addition to that there's city legislation that requires all other departments to connect a year or two ago to actually hold to budget hearings because we already have our budget hearings we are able to say budget hearings but the focus of the first should be on providinginformation , giving a little background information . i'm talking about what the priorities are in and put in feedback from the public if anyone would like to give the

information on the budget and then the second budget hearing is i believe the citywide budget legislation so i'm focused on more of the details. we actually emerged both of those because our budget requirements require that there's actually both times so you also have some detail in this budget. so financial updates. basically dbi is a specialty fund department funded by our fees. we have three primary, four primary sources charging for services, that's most of our license fees, interests and then expenditure recoveries. the first charges for services are our largest revenue source. we have over 330 in this category and it makes up the departments revenue . so if we look here we will see

a 10 year operating revenue comparison and the blue line shows october revenues. you can see how it's fluctuated and of course that big drop in 2019 i'm sorry, 2021 because of covid and the orange line shows pretty much the charges for service which impact charges and services over our budget reports that we've got total revenues impacted by the revenues. >> excuse me deputy director medicine. is there a way that you could just enlarge to have one of your powerpoint's showing? i received a message that it's easier to see with just because it'sshowing like a big presentation and a small one . >> let me go to that. i don't know whyit's not

showing . >> if i made miss neville. you just need toshare the other screen . you're sharing your preview mode. you may be able to see one of the screens as a full screen. you just need toshare that screen >> let me find it . i'm going to shop stop sharing it again.

>> that's better, thank you. perfect, i think iwas sharing my screen . thank you neville. so these are positions of revenue. here's our revenue once again. just going over 10 years and seeing a bunch of ways and seeing the impact of course thesecharges will have on our total revenues . so next we have a revenue and expansion comparison. this basically shows the red line are the total revenues that we saw. i mean the total revenues that you saw on the prior slide and initial is our expenditures over the past 10 years and what you can see is that basically over the past three years our revenues began to decline or have declined and our

expenditures are actually increased. so we have next year fiscal 2122 is our current fiscal year so these projections were based on oursix month data . ordinarily a lot of the prior-year information but because it was an anomaly with because of the covid-19 we're focusing on just looking at th prior-year . so here are our six month actual protections. last we had our january meetin that did not present our six month report because i wanted to send it here . once again, it's kind of serves as the base of where were going to be going with our revenues because you can see the charges that i talked about before , the main revenue source for

charges were about $40 million so our total would be about $53 million in the current fiscal year. and for expenditures we intend to expand about $80 million. these are preliminary especially on the interim side because these other department workorders, a lot of billing we will see more savings on this end and the same with workorders. these are very preliminary. we normally get up nine-month report to get a better understanding of what the currentyear revenues are and make adjustments from their . so before i move on to the next topic, and that will be more budget instruction going on 22,

23, are there any questions about the current year on our projections and where we are financially rightnow ? >> i'll just open it up to my fellow commissioners. >> thank you deputy director. for your communication. i wanted to clarify with the current budget that we are not having anystaffing impacts, is that correct ? >> that is correct. >> that's all for me right now. >> any other questions? i will move on. now we get into the actual 2223 2324 budget. the proposed budget. the mayor's office provides instructions in december for this upcoming budget. the mayor's office is collecting $180 million surplus

over the next two fiscal years that's citywide . due to revenue growth and also retirement savings because of the deficits in our retirement fundaccount , and constraints on costs approved but although the mayor's office is projecting a $200 billion surplus, risk and uncertainties remain . therefore there will be no general fund cuts this year but also those departments are expected to not also increase their budgets. now of course we are a special fund department, overall the types of revenues that we have so those instructions don't necessarily apply to us but the mayor's office was clear to say that in the special fund departments you have to make sure that you balance with them your revenue streams. so the priorities for the mayor this year will be restoring vibrancy in san francisco, focus on public safety, on neighborhoodcleanups, those

sorts of things . recovering the local economy . we're going to prioritize to improve poor service delivery aswell as deliver accountability and equity in programming services . and of course, our goals and priorities aligned with the mayor's office so basically our budget is based on our strategic plan goals of reviewing plans and issuing funding . actually performing inspections. high level of customer service, and limiting effective administration practices as well as actively engaging the public and educating the public about dbi so that's what our most recentstrategic plan and that's what our budget is based on , meeting those goals as well as aligning with the mayor because the mayors but presentation to all the city departments, the focus the

mayor wants to get back to his back to basics and improving facilities. that's been something and in fact doing that, stressing doing that within your existing revenues. so not trying to expand or use an existing funding and really focusing on core services. so the way were going to do that is staffing andtraining . technology improvements. equity efforts and also education and outreach. i'll go into details when we go over the specifics of where this is included in ourbudget . so let's look at our revenues. when we talk about our revenues how they have been declining, it looks like we're flattening out a little bit so we're not actually going any lowerthan year 2021 so that's good news . the bad news is that are not anywhere near where we were in prior years. i think in order to go back to

$66 million revenue you have to go back tomaybe fiscal year 1112 or something like that . so here when you look at our revenue details, i talkedabout the types of revenues we have . so we've received license fees, department license fees. interest is a big deal. we're going down by about $1.4 billion as recently as 23 years ago we were collecting $4 billion in interest alone so that really is having an impact on our revenues then of course all the numbers, those are all are charged services, all of our seeds and as you can see there are over 30 of them but the big ones are land checking revenues and because of the growth and what we're seeing from the low of last year and also because this budget was really a low-budget because we didn't know that we were bumping those revenues up to $21 million. our second largest revenue

building permits, you'll see almost $2 million. were going to bump that up to $10.7 million. these two revenues make up 50 percent pretty much when you see charges for service fluctuations because of the fluctuation in these two . and once again, we're trying to be somewhat conservative because we haven't really been at this level in years either. normally wear at about 30 million, 20 million here and 13, 14 to 15 million here we just don't know at this point in time what the uncertainties that the mayor is concerned about, talk about with making sure that you kind of stay within your current year budget for circumstance that we face so we are increasing it. where about$57 million . and then we go to our expenditures. not on it the expenditure side

we will see that we're going up by about$2 million. about $91 million . thisis probably , i want to if you're looking at what was posted and given to you on friday, it has gone up slightly to 91. i think before it's maybe a $1.4 million, 1.8 million and thesame with the revenues . they have been 55 something, it's gone up slightly to cause as we get more information can update you. so this is the latest right now. you'll see salary is primarily our largest expenditure and then to go down to the next largest you'll have interdepartmental services and those are the work orders. so that's the amount of moneywe pay to other departments for services provided to dbi or provided on behalf of dvi . so here's a summary of the changes. wetalked about the revenues already .

$4 million increase in revenue and almost $2 million in building permit revenues . however, $1 million decrease in interest as an impact on us. on expenditures, the reason you see those increases are primarily because of any realizations and what those are last year during the budget we normally go to the board and the board's budget analyst will normally review our budgets and make some cuts. in the areas of calories where they didn't actually cut provisions because of hiring, because of lower hiring through covid we were anticipating hiring certain positions until september or october of that fiscal year so they basically reduced the funding and maybe funded the position instead of a full fte maybe .5. and now in thiscurrent year .5 fte has been brought back up

again. that's why you see an increase their .we have the next largest increase would be almost $200,000 in salary and that's when we talk about our funding priorities so in salaries , our funding priorities are of course filling of vacant positions. we want to work on improving publicservices and also working on reforms . we're going to make sure we continue to fund the biggest positions. intraining we will be working on departmentwide training for everyone . and in safety, just this fiscal year we hired department internal safety officers so the safety office is coming with an entirely new take the training for departmentwide staff. we have departmentwide customer service training that we will beimplementing . we started some of them in the current year but we're going to

expand that throughout the department also departmentwide racial equity training and in addition we will be focusing on job pacific professional development so maybe some specific training for someone in specific classes. that's what that increase is. in professional services, there is an increase of about67,000 professional services." before technology expense , or expanded outreach and strategic planning so we talked about education and outreach so we're going to be focusing a lot on working on that over the next fiscal year. butthe technology improvements , there are varieties that have beengoing on with that . one of the projects is actually updating the pts. the reason you don't see an impact on the numbers here is because we have object funding that already is available. that has started this project before sowe're hoping to use

that same project funding for that . so that's why you don't see a larger increase in professiona services section . for materials and supplies once again $70,000 increase in that for safety supplies and for computer supplies and there may be some code books and other things wehave to purchase . then of course as i said before our work order budget is the single largest expenditure at $26 billion. so far we see a slight increase because of training, because in addition to outside training hr provides a variety of training for instance supervisory training and all types of training so we will see an increase so that we can have more coverage andmore training for our staff . so here's at last year's budget

meetings, the commission had requested some information about our workforce causes such a largeportion of our budget . this is just showing the trend of the reports. we talked about this lastyear. at 15 and 16 we were about 12 million, now we are at 26 million . we will be talking to the mayor's office as well as some of the other city departments because going forward getting given the fact ofour revenues that we have now , our expenses and anticipation of what our revenues would be over the next two years we will need to start making some cuts to some of our expenses and we want to start here of course because we want to make sure that we are not paying for morethan we actually need . so that's going to be a focus this fiscal year the mayor's office as well as the departments inlooking at ways to reduce this . but we didn't discuss, so we're

at 57 million in expenditures so let me go backwards. we're at $57 million inrevenue . but we're at $91 million in expenses so what does that mean? the good news is that we have reserves andwe have fund balance . so we've had that when we were during the good times when we were spending less and bringing in more too. so we have a few contingency reserves of about $41 million. then we alsohave a fund balance of about $6 million . now, in the fee contingency reserves , we are a budgeted this year to spend about $20 million of that. $26 billion of that to balance

in the current year. i know we had discussions about what our current fund balances butthe issue is that it fluctuates . we know don't know what our true fund balance is that's available until we end this current fiscal year. until we are slated to lose about $26 million the fact that we're going to look likewe have savings in our expenditures , i'll go back to that. it looks like we will have 6.2 million in extra revenue was at about 3.3 million in expenditures. if that pans out then we would needthe full $26 million to balance so that means itwill leave more money in our fund balance . but based on where we are right now , we probably have enough money to balance or the next 2 fiscal years and that's why we are going to be working this fiscal year to try to bring

down this into departmental services budget is at this point, beyond this fiscal year and probably next fiscal year we would not have theamount , if our revenues remain thesame , we will not have enough funding to cover our expenses. there is another option. after about a year or two we lowered our fees drastically in fiscal year 2016 and we were slated to do a study in 20. however that was in order to see if it's time to raise our fees again. however that in the middle of a pandemic so we didn't want to do anything with it at that point in time but over the next two years we will need to do a

new study to make sure we are right by our fees. in addition to that we want to do right by our fees but we want to be cognizant of the mayor's or at least over this next year or two the mayor trying to make it as easy as possible particularly for small businesses to lower the cost so that's why he didn't want to jump into raising fees automatically . going to be looking at these expenditures and where also going to be over the next two years doing the fee study. arethere any questions about any of this ?>> the work order, can you give us an indication as to what kind of reductions you're going to be in search of? >> unfortunately i'm not clear on what we can, what the reductions will be.we will be talking particularly to the larger ones. digital services, admin, fire.

those places have seen what's included going over everything that's going to include all those costs applicable going forward. so that's what we're going to be doing. for instance the city attorney and actually a city attorney lowered the work order last year based on prior spending. and we believe that our spending is still a little bit lowerwith the city attorney so hopefully we will be able to lower that one to . at this point i would think 2223 there will be an amount that it will go down by. this will be a two-year process because you can go from zero one year to a two-year process but that's what's going to be most of the work when we submit our budget.

between now and submitting the budget and even during the negotiation time. we haven't received a lot of the work order request from the department so we have been able to have those discussions but that's going to be something we will be working on as i understand it they would come to you with the recommendations on reduction from the different departments, that's the reques . >> the first is they would come to us with a recommendation but it will have to be tbi. we don't know if this is still applicable anymore so there can be a recommendation thatwe can discuss . are these things covered by db still for the baby covered by dbi ? it will be more of a back-and-forth. >> all right. i'm glad to seethose conversationshappening . one other question .

these right sides of the fee, that's the terminology. correct me if i'm wrong, the last time we did that it was recommended. so what happens if it comes back tothe reduction again . >> now using that our expenses are and 90 million but the actual new money is 56 million there were just a lot of projects that happened, all those projects and we collected a lot of money when the fee study was conducted they kind of looked at that one time and

used that reduction. so yes, at a minimum some fees were raised by seven percent but somewere reduced by what he, 50 percent . so yes. once again, i think going forward because our expenses have actually gone up somuch , i wouldn't anticipate there being a fee reduction. i wouldn't anticipate that. >> so unclear, your analysis is that we have in the coffers right now to sustain what we have going forwardif we never did any changes , if we had no help there on the work order line item, we are two years, is that correct? >> if we don't do something about our expenditures and if our revenues don't go up past $57 million we're at about

maybe this budgetcycle this year . >> okay. have you seen it before? >> i'm sorry, it's been a while since i've seen. >> that kind of reduction in the possibility, it's been a while since we've seen that kind of low revenue. i don'tremember everseeing that number before . >> the revenues are at fiscal year 1112 . so i think it's a combination of a variety of things. it's a combination of lower fees because even though we lowered our fees in 2015 16, if you filed a permit prior tothat , you still were able, we were still collecting issuance fees and those fees on thehigher fees . it's also based on that plan

checking revenue we discussed, those two major revenues, those are based on valuation and we seem you wish and in the permits go down and we've also seen a number of permits going down so it's been a variety of things that have happened over these past three years or so. >> what was the reduction last year that the city attorney made on the work order or just do you have that number? >> there weren't really any reductions in the work order last year. thereweren't any reductions in the work order last year . i do think when we did our year end report at the end of 2021 there were savings.so the budget itself wasn't reduced but because there was so much money saved was almost $7 million in savings at the end of last fiscal year.

a lot of that had to do with money we put aside for the move and part of thatwhich is other savings to that's what we are going to be doing to . when we talk to departments they may say we need the fall next number but if we can still historically over the past two or three years even from a strictly on an expenditurebasis , that would be the first place we want to say we should cut to go to what your actual savings because historically there have been savings over multiple years from work orders. it's just that last year it was a huge amount that wassaved . so they didn't reduce the budget but they didn't expand the total amountand that has happened a lot . >> that translates into less, okay. even though it's not really genuinely a decision that was made to feel that some of the work order requirements.okay, got you.

and yes, okay. i'm good for now, thank you. sorrycommissioners, didn't mean to all that time . any other fellow commissioners? thank you. >> i noticed that the assessor's office line items over the time ran it shown on the chart, what kind of purposes are meant by their and what they have caused that increase? >> the growth in the number of, so this order pays for appraisers. and these are the appraisers who go out and do construction permits. and for any permits. normally what happens is once you do construction or even if you do any major construction,

there's a reappraisal. and dbi has been paying for the appraisals that go do that. and the number has grown from x number of appraisers do now there are 4 appraisers over two years so that will be a conversation that we will be having with the assessor's office .>> so forgive my ignorance on that but that reappraisal changes the amount of property taxes that the assessors reported so it seems more of their job function and dbi's job function in that respect. is that an unfair assessment? >> well, we will talk to the assessor's office about that. some of the work orders that are in dbi's budget work

negotiated more at a higher citywide level. now we're going to try to actually have the negotiations between the department that we're actually funding . >> thank you for that. >> sure. is there anymore, commissioner . >> thank you. i am working at the abandoned building or vacant building fee and it seems it's $800 to register a vacant building and i'm curious why ourassessment is so low . they're saying about $5000? help me understand. >> it is extremely low. it was even lower before. during a pandemic we were doing this.some of this is based on actual collection. we haven't been collecting this

fee. i know it's about to start up again so we haven'tgone back andbumped it up yet . but before , it was enacted and then we were going to get started. it's right in the middle of the pandemic and that was going to be a double whammy . this may be an area once again where we go in ifwe're starting up again . originally we had budgeted $100,000 in our budget but that actual was very low. i'll be working with code enforcement division and start enforcing it and what would that revenue force be like so maybe that can get bumped up again but that would be very low there. >> that makes sense, thanks for that. there's definitely more than five. thank you for that.and that makes some sense. when i think about economic

vibrancy and neighborhood issues like the number of buildings and the blight that that's caused within our neighborhoods i think that aligns well with the goals. i'm curious, i find the code enforcement fees very low or fine, i'm not sure how to assess them or what we call it. i am very interested in looking at the fee assessment and maybe structuring our fees and the waythe assessment is done is important .thank you for giving us that information about how it was done last time, when it was lowered. there has to be a nexus but it seems like the nexus is done and it would be something specifics but is that something

that we can look at? what is the process for assessing fines that the department makes whether it's violation ? >> so on the fine side, we've been using sometimes it's three times, four times, nine times and it isn't related to the fee of the cost. that penalty is something i think code enforcement, the department in general as well as the city attorney have to look at because now we're not talking about cost. when we did the fee study that was just a cost and you have to make sure someone is paying more for the actual permits. the penalties have been a little bit different. that's more a conversation with city attorneys internally with the code enforcement to right side those. >> to repeat, there is no nexu

requirements . the fine and that's assessed. we can kind of make an assessment or change thecommunityharmwesee oryouknow, wecanhelpcreatethatp olicy. >> ithinkso.isthecityat torneyinthismeeting? >> goodmorningeverybody .icanspeak tothelittlebit. >> i'msorrytointerruptb utithinkrobwasgoingtospeakalso. >> deputycityattorneyrobkaplan .i'mnotsureiheardthe entirequestion.

>> iwasaskingaboutfines .formetherehastobeas tudyandactingthesize offeesanddepartment forfindibelievethere wasnotsuchanexusandi wonderwhattheprocesswouldbe soforfinessuchaspena ltiesforviolation? >> ithink tomcouldanswerthaton eifrobishavingtroubewithit . >> it'sokaypresidentmcc arthyandcommissioners .icanweighinonthatalittlebit .sanfranciscobuildin gcodeiswhatdefineswh atthepenaltiesare inrelationto workwithoutpermits orworkexceedingthesc opeofthepermit. basically,ifsomebodyisdoingwor ,iftheyhavenopermit foraparticularproperty ,it'sninetimes

thevaluationofthework thathasbeenperformed onthepermit.sothatdo esn'tmeanit'sninetimes $5000iftheyperform$5000 worthofwork todate.whatthatmeansis its ninetimes theinspectionfeesrel atedtothat$5000ofwor kthathasbeenconducted.theother penaltyisforwork thatisbeingperformed exceedingthescope ofapermit thattheymayhave andthat followsthesame trackinregardsto comingupwiththepenal tybutit'stwotimesand notninetimes thatthey'vehadapermit. theadditional codeenforcementfeesdana arebasedon costrecovery forwork thatwehavetoperforminrelation

toachievingcompliance. doesthathelpansweryo urquestioncommissioner?

>> in regard to the work order,

which is what we need to focus on to look down the road to try to getrelease their , are you getting many requests now for new work orders or is that something that happens at a certain time of the year or do we need alist as to how that process works ? >> we haven'treceived any new requests . i have received requests saying we need to review this or do that. i have let others know that we're not actually interested in increasing work orders. when that comes to my mind we're trying to reduce as many work orders as possible but normally what will happen is a lot of times before we will submit a budget schedule in a

minute but we're scheduled to submit our budget to the mayor's office february 22 and normally thework order discussions happen after that . so the departmentswill start making their request . sometimes the request between the department they may not meet that request. they may make the request to the mayor's office but they will make their requests and people will make requests, departments will make requests during that time. then we kind of find out about it during that time that we discuss it in the budget and so a lot of what you see by the end, by the time we submit the budget will not be what ultimately comes to the final budget. that's just the first phase of thebudget you're approving to get tothe mayor's office and begin negotiations that will happen during that time .

so far , it's not a new request. justgiving a heads up , this is increasing it by this and i've basically said not at this point looking to increase any work orders. >> thank you, numbersdon't lie . so just any work order that is agreed orapproved on, is it my understanding it has to get yoursignature or the director's signature ? if it's approved ? >> there is a work order agreement butnot all of these work orders agreements . some of these are budgeted and many times but we get back to that. many times there's a budget but the agreements don't come until after it's been placed in the

budget and some situations i'm getting agreements for the currentfiscal year. for signatures . >> ... writes, i've got it. thank you. i'm sorry for the commissioners, anymore questions ? please, what's your next item? >> here are the next steps for thebudget. we're going to incorporate any feedback . if the commission has anything that they're interested in including in the budget and want to incorporate that orif the public has any information , we've, just to movethrough about this we want to work with the department.

our departments to adjust our work orders we want to focus on that. we're going to conduct a second budget hearing . were going to continue to monitor and revise and meet our revenues. i'm really hoping that the first six months this fiscal year that we're using it as a base because a variety of things that were going to see and take so we really would love to increase the new revenues coming inthat will help us in our budget balancing and of course we're going to once balance the budget. werelooking at existing project funds and i mentioned earlier . we have permit tracking projects that already have funded we can use that . we will be looking at unbalanced so thoseare the next steps of what will be happening. and here's a specific schedule of what's to come . we are here. these are all the things that occurred before this meeting but we are here at our first budget meeting . we submit our budget to the controller and mayor on the

22nd. from march until april there will be budget negotiations and updates. that's where we will be updating the revenue because by then we will have nine months and that's where hoping to update the expenses particularly on the work orders. the reason you're seeing this march to april is because this year we're actually submitting. where one of the main departments. ordinarily departments go to every two years. some departments areable to go maybe once, where an early departments are budget is going to the board . and the mayor will submit our budget to the board of supervisors on may 1 and then we will have hearings . they haven't been scheduled yet in may and then finally the whole budget gets adopted by the end of july.so the only other, we have and this is the budget organization and we can

do more of this in the next week's hearing. this is just the way the budget is actually laid out .we have three major permit services, inspection services in administration and these are allthe other subdivisions that are under it . and next week i can show you. we will show revenues open up by fees and expenditures just so we can get more details on where we are in the budget . that's all i have and i'm happy to answer anyadditional questions . >> any further commissioner questions?

just one minute. well done. >> should i stop sharing? >> you can stop sharing, thank you.commissioner mccarthy had trouble getting back intothe meeting. he should be in the meeting now. president mccarthy, can you hear us ? i think he's trying to. you can hear us?he can hear you okay. >> thank you.