>> good morning and welcome to the rules committee of the san francisco board of supervisors for today monday march 7, 2022.

i'm the chair of the committee aaron peskin joined to my right by vice chair supervisor raphael mandelman and to our left is supervisor connie chan. welcome back to our first in-person meeting in two years. first one what hopefully will be many years to come of in-person meetings. i want to use this moment to thank our clerk mr. young and all of the members of department one, the clerk's office for the incredible work that you have done keeping all together remotely over the last two years. we are going to start with a hybrid meeting or individuals will be able to call in and individuals will be able to

testify remotely. at some point, we will return to the old normal. this is still an evolving situation. welcome to our first in-person meeting. mr. young do you have announcements? >> clerk: yes, the board of supervisors are convening hybrid meetings allowed in-person attendance and public comment while supervising remote access by telephone. the board recognizes equitable public access is essential and will be taking public comment in the following ways. first, public comment will be taken on each item on this agenda. those attending in-person will be allowed to speak person and we will take those who are waiting on the telephone line. for those watching channel 26 or 99 and sfgovtv.org, the public call in number is streaming across the screen. the number is (415)655-0001. then enter the meeting i.d., which is 2489 671 0734.

then press pound and pound again. you will hear the meeting discussions but you are muted and listen mode only. when your item of interest comes up and public comment is called, those joining us in person should line up to speak and those on telephone should dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. if you are on the telephone, remember to turn down your tv and all listening devices you may be using. we'll take public comment from those attending in-person first and then we'll go to our public comment telephone line. you may submit public comment in writing either of the following ways. e-mail to myself the rules committee clerk. if you submit public comment by e-mail it will be forwarded to the supervisors aincluded part of the file.

items acted upon today's meeting are expected to appear on board of supervisors agenda on march 13, 2022. that concludes my initial announcement. >> supervisor peskin: please read the first item. >> clerk: item number 1 motion approve or rejecting mayor's nomination for appointment of alex ludlum term expiring >> supervisor peskin: colleagues , we have a nomination by the mayor for the successor agency to the redevelopment agency known as the commission on community investment and infrastructure. which as you may recall, redevelopment in the state of california was dissolved back in the days of governor jerry

brown. there are a number of ongoing projects that that agency has. i note that it is now without an executive director. there's an acting executive director in the capable hands of jim morales. i had the opportunity to personally interview mr. ludlum and want to thank mayor breed for what i think is a very good appointment. this is for the balance of the team that end at the beginning of november this calendar year. mr. ludlum i like to invite you up and have you make some statements. you are clearly very well

steeped in real estate and land use matters. i note and appreciate the fact that you as a volunteer are on the board of directors of the people's community benefit district along with an impressive list of things that you do and have done on your resume. the floor is yours. good morning. >> the first in person testimony in two years. >> thank you chair peskin. thank you supervisors. i'm very honored to be giving the first testimony back in person. i'm very honored to be nominated for this role. this commission is especially appealing to me, i've been working in housing in san francisco for the majority of my career. this office will ultimately have

say over the vast majority of affordable housing to be built in this town over the next 10 or 20 years. i've been working in various community groups and this feels like a much more efficient way to contribute to one of the central issues of our city in this time. thank you very much. >> chair peskin: thank you mr. ludlum. you seem to be clear when we met about the role that a commissioner plays both to support and to interact with question the executive director, not otherwise mettle in the day-to-day affairs of the commission but to give it broad high level oversight and accountability. i appreciated that very fresh understanding that some commissioners do not understand. i want to say that for the record.

>> sure. chair peskin made reference to the people's c.b.d. i think it was fairly unique in its origins when we saw the seven member volunteer committee. four of us were in our early 30s late 20s. only two of us owned property in the district. once we formed we established a proper 25 person board but, there was a learning curve for us. i worked hard to put in policies that the board fulfilled this role, which is monitoring the activity of our executive director and making sure he's doing what he supposed to do but not calling him up to report their thoughts on various entry

level employees and that sort of thing. it's been a learning process. i'd be happy to take what i've learned working with board to the commission. >> chair peskin: any questions from colleagues on the rules committee? mr. clerk, -- supervisor chan? >> supervisor chan: i want to thank mayor's office and thank you so much for this appointment and i know the last one we have quite bit of question about qualification. i think this is more of the type of candidates that we like to see coming forward in the sense where someone actually has done community work and have expertise in the area and being able to provide technical

support and advice on the commission that is critical. thank you. >> chair peskin: point understood. well taken supervisor chan. with that, mr. clerk, why don't we open up to public comment. are there any members of the public who are present in these chambers who like to make any comment on item number one >> clerk: members of the public who wish to speak are joining us, should line up to speak. for those listening remoting please call (415)655-0001, enter the meeting i.d. 2489 671 0734 then press pound pound. once connected you need to press star 3 to enter the speaker line. for those in the queue, please continue to wait until the system indicate you have been unmuted.

then you may begin your comment. there does not appear to be in the room to speak at this time. we do have forum listeners and two callers on the line >> chair peskin: first speaker please. >> caller: good morning supervisors. my name is al. i'm speaking in support of the nomination of alex ludlum to the successor agency commission. i known alex since 2014. he's been active in the real estate industry first in real estate brokerage and then real estate development. we worked with him on the representation of united plans on purchase of its new home.

he managed the transaction and helped us close the deal. alex has been active in helping united players not only on raising capital for the current homes but on expansion of its future homes. alex has experience complicated transactionings, has assisted developer on st. joseph art society and has experience with community benefit agreement working on the market street project. he has board experience. he currently sits on the board of the community benefit district and active member of that organization. i strongly recommend alex as the commissioner for the successor agency commission. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you former commissioner lowe. big words, they are important for this panel to hear. next speaker.

>> caller: good morning. chair peskin, supervisors mandelman and chan. my name christian majority i'm the executive director of the people's community district. i miss you guys too. chair peskin, supervisor mandelman and chan. i'm calling in support of alex ludlum's appointment to this commission. as the vice president of the benefit district, alex has been instrumental in getting us off the ground. his work on the steering committee really helped us get up and running. his knowledge about all things real estate zoning and planning was invaluable to me as i got

things started at the onset of the pandemic. he never missed a meeting. always diligent and prepared, makes useful contributions. no nonsense but respective collaborative and he brings a great heart and value to the discussion. i support his appointment to this commission. i thank you for your time this morning. >> chair peskin: thank you mr. martin. more important words from another respected member from the community. are there other speakers? >> clerk: that was the last caller for this item. >> chair peskin: all right, public comment is closed. i note that it is weird to have a gavel in my hand again after two years. with that, colleagues if there is no objection or comment i will make a motion to send item one to the full board with positive recommendation.

mr. clerk on that motion roll call please. let's make the amendments remove the word rejecting and the word rejects. that is approving and approves. >> clerk: on the motion to amend. [roll call vote]. the motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: on the motions amended to send it to the full board with recommendation a roll call please. >> clerk: on that motion. [roll call vote] the motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: next item please. >> clerk: next item is item number two ordinance amending the administrative code to

establish office of cybersecurity and position of chief information security officer who in coordination with the department technology professionals is responsible for preventing, detecting the damage to city infrastructure and information resources from cyber-related incidents. and provide the city administrator with -- members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item may line up to speak or little -- if you are joining us remotely call the public comment line at (415)655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 2489 671

0734. then press pound and pound again. once connected, you will need to press star 3 to enter the speaker line. the system prompt indicate you have raised your hand. >> chair peskin: thank you mr. young. colleagues, this is timely given the situation on the planet earth as it relates to cybersecurity. this is pursuant to the executive order by the mayor that codifies existing practices as it relates to our committee on information technology in the administrative code. we are joined by city administrator's office. i do have related comments.

this legislation looks fine to me. are there any comments from committee members before we hear. welcome to being our first city department to testify in two years. >> good morning chair peskin, vase chair mandelman. i serve as deputy city administrator. i'm here to provide an overview of the proposed changes to the administrative code which as chair peskin indicated are to strengthen the cybersecurity efforts. it recognizes the city chief information security officer role and formally creates the office of cybersecurity. i will walk through the few proposed changes. i don't know -- i did provide a presentation to the clerk.

proposed ordinance will amend chapter 22 of the administrative code to formally establish the office of cybersecurity and position city chief information security officer. outline responsibility for the department in alignment with existing coit policies and the mayor's executive director. add the city ciso as member of coit and designate the city manager as chair of coit. when the primary proposed changes is to add section 22i to the administrative code to establish the office of cybersecurity as part of the department of technology and under the leadership of the city's chief information security officer. the office of cybersecurity is designed to coordinate's the city response to cybersecurity

threat. the city ciso will continue to reduce the risk of compromise to the city's information resources and lead the city's response to incidents. section 22i detailed several responsibilities for city departments. since 2016, committee on information technology, known as coit has adopted policies, requirement and standards to help provide a consistent city wide foundation for cybersecurity in the city. the responsibility set forth in section 22i reflect responsibilities set forth through coit policies. each department needs to designate a departmental information security officer to coordinate cybersecurities with the ciso. the department need to conduct cybersecurity risk assessment and maintain a cybersecurity

emergency response plan. which should be shared and review by the office of cybersecurity. the ciso will support cybersecurity. in addition to the new language added in section 22i the ordinance revises other sections of chapter 22 to add city see co as a permanent member. the current code language provides for the possibility of different chairs every two years but this change reflects the way coit has been operating for the past 10 years. section 22a4 is updated to have the city's chief information officer to be promoted to the city administrator by the mayor. but the change along more

reflect the way past appointments have been done for this position. that concludes my overview presentation. i'm available for questions. also the city's information security officers are available to help address questions as needed. >> chair peskin: thank you. one question i had relative to the composition of coit in so far as all the designated appointees under the administrative code have the authority both in the existing legislation as well as the proposed legislation to send designees as a matter of practice, who actually attends? >> from the department? >> chair peskin: from the eight permanent members, who appears in person and who appears with

the designee? >> it varies by meeting and by department. each of the departments have the department head listed as the member and they have to submit a designee letter if there are individuals who will attend coit in their place. often times it's a mix of department heads and their designees at any given meeting. it depends on the particular meeting where we might be talking about specific high level topics. >> chair peskin: in terms of functionality and consistency, does that work well enough? >> it seems as though it has been working. we have not heard complaints about it. we have to follow-up with the department head as needed. often times, the designees are individuals most responsible for implementing the policies. that's beneficial, they can most

directly speak how the policies will impact the department. >> chair peskin: on a related matter and may be this is more in the wheel house of d.t., there was talk a year or two back in the wake of 19b surveillance oversight legislation of a chiefly privacy -- chief privacy officer. can you tell us what the status of that is and whether you're still seeking that and not for today but whether that will be an appropriate person if that position were come to exist to add to the coit membership? >> the creation of a privacy officer with the chiefly privacy officer was discussed within the city administrator's office.

couple of budget cycles ago. ultimately it was cut during the board budget process. currently there's no staffing for chiefly privacy officer position or any support staff and any related work under 19b or other privacy work related to the privacy charter amendment is being done by a staff member of coit currently. >> chair peskin: there was a staff member who was doing that, i believe that staff member took a job with the state of california. >> that was the director of coit. that individual did take a job with the state and there's a new coit director has started. she has begun doing some of that work in addition to her other work, which is be responsible for the day-to-day activities of coit as a whole. >> chair peskin: may be that is a conversation to have as our budget is formulated in advance

of may and june. i will take that offline with you. i can see a parallel piece of legislation that may be worth policy consideration with regard to that position and the role that plays in our government given our overarching concerns about focusing on privacy throughout our departments and through coit. with that, are there any comments or questions from committee members? seeing none. why don't we open up to public comment? are there any members in the chambers who like to comment. mr. pollock, do you have anything you like to add sir? [ indiscernible ] okay. are you still at d.t. or lafco now? our new local agency formation commission executive director is

in the chambers. jeremy pollock welcome. with that, mr. young -- >> clerk: members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up to speak along the windows. for those listening remotely call (415)655-0001. enter the meeting i.d. 2489 671 0734 then press pound pound. once connected, you will need to press star 3 to enter the speaker line. for those in the queue, continue to wait until the system indicate you have been unmuted and that will be your cue to begin your comment. there does not appear to be anybody in the meeting room for public comment at this time. we can move ton to our retote call in speakers. we have three people on the

line. >> caller: this is david pilpel. good morning. it's weird to be calling into a room meeting like this. on the ordinance on page 3 line 20 i believe that should be section 2. there are two section threes and no section two. i believe that should be section 2 on page 3 line 22, i believe at the end, cybersecurity, and, should have a space between security. on page 5 line 4, i'm wondering if it should be the responsibility of the m.t.a. board or if it can be the m.t.a. director or simply the m.t.a.

shall provide rather than charging the m.t.a. board with that responsibility. on page 7 line 4, i believe it should read be appointed by the chief information officer. i would add the word officer. other than those technical edits. i support the legislation it is straightforward and make sense given what's going on in the world and the city. >> chair peskin: thank you for those comments. are there any other members for public comment on this item 2. >> clerk: that completes our remote callers. there are no additional callers. >> chair peskin: public comment is closed. madam deputy city attorney pearson for the first in person

publicly access i believe meeting. welcome. as to the caller's suggestions.most of them made g. that will be fixing on page 3, the 22 reference at line 20. do you agree? >> yes. change section 3 to section 2. >> chair peskin: then adding a space at line 22 between security and the word and. >> i agree. >> chair peskin: if we want to have a parallel construction between the m.t.a. provision and their charter authorities and autonomy as we have in subsection d, relative to the public utilities commission, where it seems to say the p.u.c. commission actually there's a parallel construction. we would reject that comment i

assume. then i do agree that on page 7 at line 4 the word officer should be inserted. >> i do. >> chair peskin: we will make the amendments on page 3 and on page 7 will not change anything on page number 5. i will make that motion to amend on that motion, a roll call please. >> clerk: on that motion. [roll call vote] the motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: thank you to mr. pilpel for reading that so carefully. on the item as amended, i will make a motion to send it to the full board with a positive recommendation on that motion, a roll call please.

>> clerk: yes. [roll call vote] the motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: we are adjourned.

>> 5, 4, 3, 2 , 1. cut.

>> we are here to celebrate the opening of this community garden. a place that used to look a lot darker and today is sun is shining and it's beautiful and it's been completely redone and been a gathering place for this community. >> i have been waiting for this garden for 3 decades. that is not a joke. i live in an apartment building three floors up and i have potted plants and have dreamt the whole time i have lived there to have some ability to build this dirt. >> let me tell you handout you -- how to build a community garden. you start with a really good idea and add community support from echo media and levis and take

management and water and sun and this is what we have. this is great. it's about environment and stewardship. it's also for the -- we implemented several practices in our successes of the site. that is made up of the pockets like wool but they are made of recycled plastic bottles. i don't know how they do it. >> there is acres and acres of parkland throughout golden gate park, but not necessarily through golden community garden. we have it right in the middle of

>> chair haney: this meeting will come to order. this is the march 2, 2022 meeting. i am chair haney. i want to thank sfgovtv for broadcasting this meeting. do you have any announcements? >> thank you, mr. chair. the minutes will reflect committee members participated in this remote meeting through video as though physically present. public access is essential and invite public participation. public comment will be available on each item. channels 68 or 9. or sfgovtv. we areceening the call-in number. you will be allowed two minutes to speak. comments to speak during public comment are available via phone by calling 415-655-0001.

id24958561323. when kecked you will hear discussions and in listening need only. when your item comes up dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. call from quiet location, speak slowly and turn down your streaming device. you may submit public comment to myself the budget and finance committee clerk. if you submit public comment by e-mail it will be forwarded to the supervisors and included as part of the official file. written comments may be sept by u.s. postal service to city hall. room 244. san francisco california. finally items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda march 8, 2022.

mr. chair. >> chair haney: thank you, mr. clerk. we have a full meeting today. thank you everyone for your patience. i believe i will start with item 2. we will come back to item 1. >> clerk: item 2. a resolution to approving modification number 6 to airport contract 9186 with the bank of new york melon trust company for bond trustee service goes to increase the contract amount by $1 million for a new total not to exceed $3.8 million to commence following approval by the board of supervisors. two. retroactively approve airport contract 9186 with a contract amount of $260,000 with a term date of november 4, 1991 to

indefinite term. 3. retroactively from december 4, 2001 to increase by $600,000 for a total not to exceed $860,000. 4. retroactively from february 6 approve modification 2 to increase by 900,000 for a total not to exceed $1.7 million. 5. retroactively from april 1, 2012 approve modification number 3 to increase contract amount by $800,000 for a total not to exceed amount $2.5 million. 6. retroactively from april 1, 2017 approve modification 4 to increase contract amount $190,000 for a total not to exceed amount of $2.7 million and 7 retroactively from june 1, 2018 approve modification 5 to update trustee fee payment schedule with no changes to the contract amount.

members of the public to comment call 415-655-0001. id24958561232. pound twice. dial star 3 to line up to speak. the system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. wait until you have been muted and you may begin your comments. mr. chair. >> we have the airport to present. >> good morning. really quick we are experiencing internet connections at the airport. if i do cut out, please let me know. the item before you is retroactive approval of trustee agreement with the bank of new york melon trust company to provide trustee and pay agent services for airport revenue

bonds approval of modification 6 to increase contract by $1,050,000 to bring it to $3.8 million. it requires a bond trustee and paying agent and sets forth duties. bank of new york melon trust was selected after competitive process and has served as paying agent on all bonds issued by the commission. the company represents bond holders and making timely principal and interest payments to bond holders among other services. this separate trustee agreement sets forth the terms of payment of trustees fees and expenses was executed in 1992. the agreement continues until it is terminated in accordance with the master bond resolution which provides the trustee service continues until the trustee

resigns or is removed and successor takes over the role. the airport regrets this agreement and prior modifications acceding $500,000 were not presented for stand alone approval. the agreement is intertwined with the master bond resolution the airport in consultation with city attorney considered the agreement and modifications to be covered by the board's multiple approves of the issuance of bonds under the master bond resolution. to date 24 resolutions have been approved since 1991. review of the contract to ensure charter section 9.118 compliance. the city attorney has advised staff to seek board approval for both modification 6 and retroactive approval of trustee agreement and prior modifications to resolve uncertainty. the airport will request board approval as required under 9.118

for all future modifications to the agreement. the bla recommended approval. i am happy to answer questions along with my colleague chief financial officer and capital finance director. thank you for your time. >> chair haney: thank you. i appreciate it. we will hear the bla report on this item. >> good morning, supervisors. nick bernard. this proposed resolution approved the modification to the agreement between airport and bank of new york melon trust company for bond services increasing from $2.75 million to $3.8 million. it retroactively approves the original agreement and prior five modifications. the commission approved the master bond resolution in 1991

which defines the terms that the airport can use to issue revenue bonds and provides the airport allows to airport to enter agreement with the bond trustee to administer payment of principal and interest on the revenue bonds. the board has approveddish who swans of those bonds in accordance of the city charter and bond resolution which according to airport staff the issuance contemplated a bond trustee would be necessary to administer the airport debt. the approval was to approval. the actual agreement was never include understand the prior approvals even though it exceeded the 10 year term. that typically requires board approval. airport staff as mentioned in

consultation with the city attorney's office decided to resolve any uncertainty about compliance with the charter requirement that required board approval of contracts that exceed 10 year term or greater. that is why we are bringing this resolution before you today. we recommend approval. i am happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. supervisor mar. >> supervsor mar: i appreciate this item. the explanation about it. obviously, the extreme retro activity caught my eye. it looked like it should have been brought before the board for approval maybe 20 years ago. i understand that is a unique situation with the master bond

agreement being approved. i appreciate your explanation. i am glad that is advice from the city attorney's office to bring this forward for our approval now. i have a question. are there other does this highlight other possible problems or issues with other contracts or agreements that haven't been brought before the board for approval? it is a very unique situation. >> thank you for that question, supervisor mar. because of the supervisors focus on charter section 9.118 we have been doing extensive reviews of the contract in conjunction with the controller and city attorney to make sure complicated issues that might have not triggered

9.118 does get brought to the board and we are working very hard to make sure our contracts upcoming are never retroactive appast contracts that have gotten approval before and gotten through the city attorney process are getting the second review to make sure we are fulfilling our charter 9.118 duties. we are going through that right now in conjunction with the controller and city attorney's office. >> supervsor mar: when do you expect to complete review of all agreements? >> it is ongoing process. we are getting guidance from the controller and city attorney's office. i don't know what that end date looks like. it is an ongoing process to make sure every time we bring contracts to the airport commission we are looking and seeing if that fields to be

brought to the board under 9.118 under a more focused scrutiny. >> supervsor mar: thanks, chair haney. >> public comment, please. >> clerk: we are checking for callers. members of the public to comment on item 2 please press star now. for those on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. that is your key to comment. mr. adkins please let us know if there are comments on this item. >> i am here for item 9. >> press star 3 to re-enter the caller pool. when i call item 9 then you can

jump in the queue then. any further callers for item 2? >> no further callers in ifque. >> chair haney: public comment is closed. then to make a motion to move item 2 to full board with positive recommendation. can we have a roll call vote, please. >> clerk: on the motion to forward to full board with positive recommendation. vice chair safai. >> eye. >> member mar. >> aye.

>> chair haney. >> we have three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you. >> i want to say it is a pleasure working with your office, chair haney. thank you very much. >> i appreciate that. thank you. next item. >> item 1. admission fees to the japanese tea garden to discount other admission fees as well as san francisco botanical garden. the gardens to require the recreation and park department to waive admission fees for veterans at the gardens to fund these changes by reauthorizing the recreation and park department to set admission fees for nonresident adults at the

gardens through flexible pricing based on certain factors and to ensure consistency among all three gardens and affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act. call 415-655-0001. dial star 3 to speak. system prompt will indicate you raised your hand. wait until you are unmuted to begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chair haney: thank you. we have heard this item many times. i am not going to ask rec and park to make a presentation again. colleagues, are there any further questions or comments on this item before we move it forward? anything from the bla? >> the only update is that the

legislation before you changed the flexible prices so instead of it being 50% above the park code authorized fees it is now $7. $1 amount cap rather than percentage cap. that is the only change. we consider it a policy matter for the board. >> chair haney: can we open this up to public comment. i will give one minute each. we have heard a lot of public comment and there is a ton of support and we support it as well. public comment one minute each. >> clerk: we are checking for callers in the queue. members of the public to comment on item 1 press star 3 now to be added to the line to speak. if you are on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. when you begin the comments for this item clocking at one

minute. please let us know if there are caught callers to comment. >> there are no caller in the queue. >> thank you. mr. chair. >> chair haney: public comment is closed. thank you to the folks who called in a number of time os this and expressed their views and be for everyone who contributed to it. thank you. i make a motion to move item 1 to the full board with a positive recommendation. roll call vote, please. >> to forward to the full board with positive recommendation. vice chair safai. >> aye. >> member mar. >> aye. >> chair haney. >> aye. we have three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you. mr. clerk. item 3. >> a resolution authorizing the tax collector to sell at public

auction certain parcels of tax defaulted real property. members to comment call 415-655-0001 meeting id24958561232. star 3 to speak. the system prompt will indicate you raised your hand. wait until you are unmuted to begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chair haney: we have amanda from the office of the treasure to present on this item. welcome. >> thank you, good morning, supervisors. the resolution today authorizes the tax collector to sell tax defaulted properties at public auction. as a bit of background, the auction is governed by state law. property becomes eligible for auction when an owner fails to pay taxes for five years and we are required to offer property for auction that have remained

delinquent nine years. due to covid-19 this is the first auction since 2019. the 341 parcels listed today are a tiny percent of the structures. there are 10 where structures formerly existed, 224 time shares. remainder are unbuildable parcels very small lots and under water lots. we collect more than $3.3 billion in property tax payments annually. i am proud to say more than 99% of our property owners pay property tax bills on time and in full. before we brought these parcels to you today we have closely scrutinized each parcel. we thoroughly researched physical characteristics and ownership history. we used property information

available from the assessor and planning department. we also used our own debt collection experts to search publicly available and proprietary databases. other governmental records and social media and internet searches. we have sent regular mailings to the property owners, to the property and any other related addresses on record for the entirety of the time the taxes were delinquent. we have closely tracked returned mail and worked diligently to identify and reach out to as many parties of interest as possible. we have parcels on the list with no known contact information. we take additional steps. this all exceeds the state rights. once this list is approved by the board we will mail notifications to all contiguous parcels to make them aware of the auction and we physically

post on vacant parcels. we have taken additional steps that exceed state law for any occupied property where there could be an individual at risk of losing their home. sheriff's deputies visited each property to provide in person notification. in partnership with housing and community development we brought additional social services resources to assist individuals to pay taxes to remain housed. when approved this list will be published in the newspaper and will be available on the website. i want to note that before the hearing we submitted a substitute list and committee members removed 7 parcels paid in full and one with defect in noticing. i am happy to take any questions or comments today. thank you.

>> supervisor safai: thank you, amanda for your office's hard work. i know this is not easy to be involved in auctioning off people's properties. particularly when so many of these -- it is a small fraction but not an easy thing to do. my office has been in contact with you. we received a call from one of the property owners on this list 239 fair lawns. there is an ongoing estate dispute that is resolved. we think with time this property owner in a very short amount of time should be able to pay the back taxes and therefore, the parcel should be removed from the auction list today. the city attorney had advised us we can make modifications to the list. i would ask we make an amendment

and remove 239 fair lawns. after that i am in full support of moving this list to the full board. >> chair haney: i want to give her an opportunity to respond. is there more information about that? can somebody present on the situation? >> you will hear from the person in charge of estate. they are going to call in. we had extensive conversations with them. there was some family member took over control of the estate. there was an issue with back taxes. they have to sell the property before they can pay the back taxes. they are working through that process to get the property listed. they are moving expeditiously to sell the property to pay the back taxes. you will hear directly from the

actual person that is in charge of the estate. they should be calling in today. >> chair haney: is there any -- were you aware of this issue? do you have a response? we give people an opportunity to respond. >> our office has been in touch with the trustee several times. also with the individual who is residing in the home. we are aware of the situation. it is not unusual for us to encounter family disputes and issues around an estate when somebody passes away. as you might imagine, it is rare when we have homes reach this stage in our auction because the home are so valuable the amount

of taxes due is really dwarfed by the value of the home. when they get to this point in the auction there is quite an extensive back story. we are aware of this and have referred these individuals to the mayor's office of housing and community development for additional support. we did learn along with the supervisor that you all have the ability to remove individual parcels from the list both in committee and at the full board and i am sure the city attorney can share a bit more about that if you would like more information. >> chair haney: if we remove it you can put it back on? what is the timeline around that a year? >> we hold the auction annually. it would be removed for this year and if the taxes are still unpaid it would be back on the list for next year.

>> chair haney: okay. where is this? is this your district. >> supervisor safai: yes, sir. 239 fair lawns. i am bringing it up. it is one of my constituents. they called me. >> chair haney: you didn't say that at the outset. >> supervisor safai: sorry. >> chair haney: you could have been helping anybody about here. >> supervisor safai: i would have gone out of my way to say this is someone else's district. >> chair haney: i am happy to defer to you on this one. is there a bla report on this item? >> we have no report on this item. >> chair haney: with that public

comment, please. >> clerk: thank you, chair haney. operations is checking for caller in the queue. members of the public please press star 3 to speak. for those on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. that is your queue to begin. any callers? >> can you hear me okay? >> your time has started. >> can you hear me okay? >> your time has started. do we have a caller on the line? >> can you hear me okay. >> yes, we can hear you. >> thanks. i couldn't tell. good morning david pillpute. on item 3 the tax collector has

checked this many times in the way described to avoid like the presidio terrace event from a few years ago which we want to avoid. i appreciate the work above and beyond what is required in the law to ensure that everyone has full and complete and more and complete notice. thank you to treasure amanda and the rest of the team and the tax collector's office. my only suggestion is that future resolutions include a clause summarizing the total number of parcels as ms. freed described with the number total occupied and not occupied. that is helpful and the total amount of overdue taxes to put the item in some further

context. again as described. i did notice one name that seemed familiar so i will contact that person and encourage them to be in touch with the office to avoid sale under these provisions. thank you very much to the treasure and tax collector's office for their work on this unfort beliness issue -- unfortunately necessary issue. thanks for listening. >> hi, i am calling regards to the 710-6044. my attorney has done paperwork back in december. we were not aware until februard our request. that is when i started to calling anyone to give

assistance. [indiscernable] so much was done that i am trying to get the house ready to sell. it doesn't make any sense for $34,000. i am working hard to handle the situation to make sure the property is not lost. >> thank you for your comments. >> she didn't state the address. are you calling about 239 fair lawns? >> yes, i am. 239 fair lawns street. >> i wanted to get that on the record. thank you.

>> clerk: any more callers in the queue? >> no further callers in the queue. >> chair haney: public comment is closed. supervisor safai do you want to make an amendment? >> supervisor safai: yes to remove 239 fair lawns from the list. >> chair haney: roll call on that. is that clear to the city attorney? >> that is clear. >> chair haney: roll call, please on that amendment. >> clerk: i don't think the resolution requires amendment. we note we will remove that address from the updated parcel list. we can move along with the resolution as is. >> chair haney: i make a motion to move the item resolution to

the full board with a positive recommendation and updated. >> clerk: on that motion with positive representation vice chair affisee. >> aye. >> member mar. >> aye. >> chair haney. >> aye. >> we have three ayes. >> thank you. >> chair haney: please call item 4. >> a resolution authorizing the general manager of the san francisco public utilities commission to execute power enterprise operating budget funded agreement pro.0152 with apx incorporated to assist with power scheduling coordination services required for the sf p.u.c.'s participation in the

california independent system operator electricity market for an amount not to exceed $136.5 million with services anticipated to begin in april 2022 and end in march 2027 for a term of five years. please call 415-655-0001. id24958561232. pound twice if you haven't done so dial star 3 to line up to speak. the prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. mr. chair. >> chair haney: thank you. we have water here to present on this item. >> i am going to do a brief summary of the scheduling related services agreement. the sfpuc provides power through

the california independent system operator. in order for the sfpuc to utilize it must contract with a registered coordinator are as interface. apx was the sole bidder. the copy of services ensures all energy and retrieving of the energy schedules are all accounted for. apx assessed minimum skills and qualified as defined by the tariffs. the compensation to apx not to exceed $6 million. past due shall not exceed $130.500000. it represents calculation and

billing and invoices for participating. lastly, the primary obstacles are the lack of 24 hour realtime operation desk and enable to make timely timely payments. that is all i had. thanks for your time. let me know if you have questions or comments. >> chair haney: thank you. i know we have a bla for this item and potential amendments. >> yes, thank you, chair. this would approve a power scheduling coordinator between p.u.c. and apx five years starting april 2022. total not to exceed $136.5 million. as mentioned the pc does not

meet regulatory requirements for being scheduling worldnatedtor for the transactions -- coordinator for the transmission network. the purpose of this contract is to allow apx to provider services to did department. of the $136.5 million. $130.5 million are budgeted as electricity transactions. as we show on page 14 of the report the cost of the apx services included in the contract is $3.2 million. the resolution is not to exceed amount assumes budget of $6 million for the services. we do recommend reduction in the total not to exceed amount of $1,757,200 for a total not to exceed $134,000,000.742800.

this would allow $4 million for the apx services which is reasonable cushion to accommodate unexpected services. i can answer any questions. >> i want to ask ms. jones if there is any response to the bla's report here and recommendation. >> i think that we agree that we could reduce that number by the amount they recommended. we were just trying to put in a cushion. we are unsure how the electric market is changing. we were nervous about down the road. that cushion will be sufficient if we have to come back and ask for -- come back to the board for increase.

we will have time to plan for that. it was the idea so much has changed in the market in the past few years. and clean power hasn't been off the ground when we signed the last contract. it is the idea trying to plan for what is coming. i think that the buffer they provide will be enough. if we have to come back, we will. >> chair haney: colleagues, any thoughts or questions or comments on this? i am inclined to accept the bla recommendation. open the public comment, please. >> clerk: operations is checking for callers. members who wish to comment press star 3 to be added to the line to speak. if you are on hold wait until the system indicates you are unmuted to comment. please let us know if there are any callers to comment on this item. >> there are no callers in the

queue. >> clerk: mr. chair. >> chair haney: public comment is closed. i want to make a motion to accept the amendment offered by the bla. can we have a roll call on that please. >> motion to amend as recommended by the bla. >> safai. >> aye. >> mar. >> aye. >> chair haney. >> aye. >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair haney: a motion to move the item to the full board with positive recommendation as amended. >> clerk: on that motion to forward to the full board. >> aye. >> member mar. >> aye. >> chair haney. >> aye. >> we have three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you.

please call item 5. ordinance authorizing the office of cannabis to accept and expand a grant award in the amount of $3,075,769 from the department of cannabis control for the local jurisdiction assistance grant program and amending the salary ordinance for figures cal years 21-22 and 22-23 to provide addition of one grant funded class 1824 principal administrative analyst position. one senior administrative positions and three grant funded 1822 administrative analyst positions at the office of cannabis for the period on or around february 11, 2022 through

march 31, 2025. if you wish to comment call 415-655-0001. id24958561232. pound twice. please dial star 3 to speak. a system prompt will indicate you are unmuted to comment. mr. chair. >> chair haney: thank you. we have john pierce from the city administrator's office to present on this item. >> good morning. i will pull up our presentation. thank you for taking the time to hear this item. i am john pierce, office of cannabis joined by jeremy schwartz. we are here to talk about a

grant to the local jurisdiction assistance grant. the source of the grant is state regulatory partner california department of cannabis control. the purpose of the grant to expedite approval of cannabis permits and licenses. for context state issues licenses and state would like the current provisional license into a permanent licensing system. the state licensing process depends on the local permitting process. this is to expedite and continue to support the equity community. the term of the grant is from february of 2022 through march 2025. more than three years. total award is over $3 million. the impact is to allow our office to process permits more

quickly. the cannabis equity committee will be the first to benefit because our office prioritizes applications from equity applicants and will have no impact on general fund. proposal 100% of the grant dedicated to enhancing the process through new positions which will be fully funded by the grant. no impact on the general fund dedicated. budget for technical assistance for the equity committee including things like access to engineers to help equity applicants. funding for process improvements through the automation of routine work. the datacenter and some budget for our city partners. we are excited about this grant. we think it will help us do our job better. it will allow us to make critical structural improvements

and allow us to provide better services to more people. i will open the floor to questions. >> chair haney: thank you. i do not believe there is a bla report on this item. colleagues questions or comments about this grant? public comment please. >> if you wish to comment press star 3. if you are on hold continue to wait until the system indiits you are unmuted to begin. any callers? >> there are no caller in the queue. >> chair haney: thank you. public comment is closed. thank you for your work, mr. pierce. i will move for positive

recommendation. roll call vote. >> clerk: forward to full board with positive recommendation. safai. >> aye. >> mar. >> aye. >> chair haney. >> aye. >> we have three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you. please call item 6. >> clerk: ordinance retroactively authorizing the san francisco public library to accept and expand a grant award in the amount of $2 million from the andrew mellon foundation for the jail and reentry services program for january 1, 2022 through december 31, 2023 and amending the salary ordinance for 21-22 and 22-23 for one grant funned full-time position in class 3630 librarian one and

1822 administrative analyst. one grant funded full-time position in class 1823 senior administrative analyst at the public library for february 1, 2022 through december 31, 2023. members of the public should call 415-655-0001. id24958561232. pound twice. if you haven't done be so dial star 3 to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate you raised your hand. wait until you are unmuted to begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chair haney: we have dr. austin to present on this item. welcome. >> thank you for your time and having us here today. we will tell you about the project we have the functioning for. we are focusing on

incarceration. i am jail reentry at the san francisco public library. the grant is $2 million over a two-year period with two sub grantees. one is american library association which is national advocacy association for library. other is colorado state office of research service. at the direction we support us in our department and getting additional staff to administer this grant. we know there is a large need for more information on library services. we have been in the local jails here for 3.5 years. over that period of time we have been in discussion with many, many librarians across the country about their needs and what services they provide. there is a real lack of services

generally. i am an academic. my book just come out the end of last year. i have done extensive research on this topic. you will see a need over the years in my course of research. what we are going to do is build a foundation for librarians and information professionals to think about library services to people incarcerated and to identify the types of models that exist for doing this work. part of how we will share is through gis map that people will have available through the american library association website so people interested in doing this work can look at the models to see where the services don't exist and the court systems of people incarcerated will draw from the resource. we will builds professional capacity through training series

for a year for more librarians and staff are able to get training. we will work with community groups with strong ties with people incarcerated to make sure we are on the right track of our focus and work to conduct our research. the american library association will revise the standards for the service. they haven't been updated for 30 years. there is a huge change how we access information. we are going to support them in receiving digital models and piloting to see what is most effective important people experiencing incarceration. many people experiencing incarceration don't have access to technology. there is a learning curve on their release. this is the rules of our community partners.

you can it laid out in the last slide. here is our chart personnel. we will have an age list to -- analyst to keep us on track officially. we have an additional librarian to work an long side us in the jails and will assist with research activities. we will bring out the analyst to make sure the gis tool is robust and intuitive. this is the budget breakdown. we are half and half throughout the course. we work on the standards that have begun. there is a scheduled hearing for this june to allow the budget going towards work this year. the library league will support through the purchase of software to help us with grant reporting.

we feel fairly certain this will increase the number of libraries providing services to people incarcerated. the grant activities will help us to provide better services to local patrons. we hope that we will be able to the community groups and promote the work of groups that have been providing information to incarcerated people for decades. we know that some of our conversations of librarians that this is needed. they will be distributing reports that we will create about the lack of resources and over time the increase of the resources for next year. i am open to any questions. thank you very much for your

time. >> thank you for your work in this great program. excited about it. thank you for that overview. is there a bla report? no. any questions or comments, colleagues. public comment, please. >> clerk: yes, chair haney. operations checking for callers. members of the public to comment press star 3 to be added to the line to speak. if you are on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted to begin your comments. any callers? >> there are no caller in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. mr. chair. >> chair haney: public comment is closed. thank you so much for your work and this great program and grant

and partnership. it is exciting we appreciate everyone for their leadership and commitment. i want to make a motion to move item 6 to full board with positive recommendation. roll call, please. >> to forward to full board with positive recommendation. vice chair safai. >> member mar. >> aye. >> chair haney. >> aye. >> safai absent. we have two ayes with vice chair safai absent. >> all right. it looks like he is connecting. >> i. >> supervisor safai: technical difficulties. i am in support.

aye. >> clerk: it is now three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you so much. i appreciate your work. mr. clerk item 7. >> resolution authorizing the department of homelessness and supportive housing to execute a standard agreement with the california department of housing and community development for up to approximately $54.7 million of project home key grant funds to accept and expand those funds for the acquisition of the property located at 1321 mission street for permanent supportive housing and to support operations upon execution of the standard agreement through june 30, 2026 approving and authorizing hsh to commit approximately $16 million in required matching funds for acquisition of property and minimum of five years of operating costs.

authorizing the director to enter into additions and amendments and other modifications to the standard agreement and the home key documents that do not materially increase the obligations or liabilities or materially decrease the benefits of to city affirming the planning departments determination under california environmental quality act and adopting the planning department's finding of consistency with the general plan and the eight priority policies of planning code section 101.1. call 415-655-0001 and dial star 3 to speak. system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. wait until you are unmuted to comment. mr. chair. >> chair haney: thank you. we have hsh to present on this item.

welcome. >> good morning. chair haney and supervisors. thank you for having us. i am deputy direct for for communications and legislative affairs. we are pleased to be here to seek approval to accept and expand the first 2021 home key grant awarded to the city to support acquisition and operations of the property at 1321 mission street. the board of supervisors authorized the city to acquire this property in october as part of the mayor's homeless recovery plan to acquire 1500 new units by june this year. we are on track and home key is how we are able to do that. this property will provide affordable housing with 24/7 support services for households

exhibit g homelessness. 160 units with private baths and kitchen nets. 120 studios for adults and the three bedroom units for families with homelessness. the resolution before you today authorizes hsh to enter into the standard agreement with the state to accept and ex spend the resources not to exceed $54.8 million in home key grants to the acquisition and operations of the property. approves hsh to commit $16 million in matching funds and minimum of five years of operating funds through prop c resources. a bit on the financing of the project. the home key grants for $54.8 million. $48 million of that is for

acquisition. $6.6 million for operations. overall costs $86.7 million. 48 of that from home key and 35 or excuse me 38.5 out of prop c. in terms of the operations of these resources, $6.6 million in home key and 9.2 in local funds allocated in our budget. i can take any questions you have. >> chair haney: is there a bla report? >> in would authorize the department of homelessness and supportive housing to execute standard agreement with the state housing and community development department to receive a grant of $54.8 million

of home key funds. this would be used to fund the acquisition and initial operations for 1321 mission property used for permanent supportive housing. it also authorizes the department to commit $16 million in required matching funds for the project. as mentioned in october 2021 the board approved purchase of this property at cost of $86.6 million. as we show on page 17 of our report. the grant provides $48.2 million towards purchase of the property. $6.6 million to subsidize operations at the property for five years. the remaining purchase and operating costs are expected to be funded by prop c funds. i do recommend approval. happy to answer any questions.

>> chair haney: thank you. can you open up to public comment, please. >> yes, chair haney. operations is checking for caller in the queue. members of the public to provide comment press star 3 to be added to the line to speak. if you are on hold wait until you are unmuted. mr. adkins. do we have any callers? >> no caller in the queue. >> chair haney: public comments is closed. we are excited about another home key grant. thank you for your leadership. it is desperately needed. we appreciate your leadership in securing it. with that i will make a motion to move item 7 to the full board with positive recommendation. roll call vote please.

>> on that motion to forward to the full board with positive recommendation. >> supervisor safai: there is something going on. i want a quick comment and i am happy to support the full recommendation to the board. i saw this project getting built. i am very familiar with this building. i think for the record to say this opportunity is something that we need to continue to expand, continue to take advantage of and this is something that has not presented itself in the past. i am excited we have ability to use prop c and home key money for this change to put things in place for this program. i am excited to see this happen. thank you, supervisor haney for supporting this. this is your district. we will continue to champion the

home key program, champion acquisition of buildings. anything that is being talked about out there today to help supportive housing or affordable housing to help with housing crisis, affordable housing. housing those unhoused, nothing compares to this. this is a phenomenal way to move quickly, to have good clean state-of-the-art housing for individuals that need the type of support so this is a phenomenal purchase in a wonderful location and i am 100% behind this. thank you to hsh and the entire team for the hard work they put into this. supervisor haney for building bg support for this.

>> chair haney: i appreciate those words. >> clerk: there is a motion on the floor. forward with positive recommendation. vice chair savvy. >> aye. >> mar. >> aye. >> haney. >> aye. >> we have three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you for your work. mr. clerk. can you please call item 8. >> clerk: item 8. ordinance appropriating 7 $0,000 from the general reserve to municipal transportation agency to support free parking in the

portsmouth square grog in february of fiscal year 21-22. call 415-655-0001 id249585861232. press pound twice. dial star 3 to line up to speak. system prompt will indicate you have raised your hands. wait until you are unmuted to begin comments. mr. chair. >> chair haney: we have some amendments. i think we will be on this. >> supervsor mar: thank you, chair haney. i want to thank mayor breed and supervisor chan for their work and leadership on this. i do have some amendments that

supervisor chan requested i introduce. i will start off with the budget saying this item was introduced two things have happened. support for transportation in lunar new year parade was expanded to cover muni trips city-wide at additional costs not originally anticipated by this ordinance. the total cost needed to cover free parking at the portsmouth square garage was clarified. it is less than $700,000 that was stated in the introduction of the ordinance. with a goal of updating to reflect true cost of free parking and free muni, my office has consulted with supervisor chan and she has prepared or we have worked with her to prepare

the appropriation amount. i just wanted to read the amendment into the record. for the short title we are adding and transit fares after parking and striking $700,000 and replacing with $554,000. for the log total $700,000 and replaces with $554,000 and adding and transit after garage on page 1 line 19 s.add $554,000. page 2 line three. strike $700,000 and add $554,000. page 2 line 9. add and transit fairs after garage. page 2 line 16 and 24. strike $700,000 and add

$554,000. it is my understanding that these amendments are substantive and we would if we adopt them we need to continue this item for a week. >> chair haney: i move we adopt the amendment as stated. and continue this item for one week. supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: i am good. i am on here as cosponsor. thank you. >> chair haney: can we take a vote on that amendment, please. >> clerk: yes, chair haney. on the motion by member marto accept the amendment as stated.

vice chair safe. >> aye. >> mar. >> aye. >> haney. >> aye. >> we have three ayes. >> chair haney: now we will continue for one week. i want to make a motion to continue 8 to continue to march 9th. >> on that motion to continue this matter to the budget and finance committee meeting of march 9th as amended. vice chair safai. >> aye. >> member mar. >> aye. add me as cosponsor. i thought i was on there. >> chair haney. >> aye. >> we have three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you. we will have this back next

week. please call item 9. >> clerk: item 9 ordinance amending the public works code to regulate vending, require permits for vending and authorize permit fees and enforcement actions, amending provisions of the administrative business and tax regulations park and police codes to confirm with those amendments and amending the port code to merge its permit program with the public works permit program, repealing reporting provisions from the health code and adopting findings under the california environmental quality act. call 415-655-0001. id24958561232. pound twice. if you haven't done so dial star 3 to speak. system prompt will indicate you have raised your hands.

wait null you are unmuted. mr. chair. >> vice chair safai for remarks before we bring to the mayor's office. >> supervisor safai: thank you, chair haney. thank you to all involved in this. i know supervisor ronan has joined us. the mayor's office has been a collaborative effort. san francisco for the last two years we have been out in the streets and then ultimately forming a working group to deal with this organized retail crime that has been plaguing our city in a very aggressive way. it is something that plays itself out in multiple areas. there was air store front be from the tenderloin found to be selling thousands of thousands

worth every sold items. we have seen videos of people walking out of stores. people see that snapshot and think this is a one off. this is desperation. what we have learned from are the working with california retailers association and chief scott, who is my co-chair of the organized retail crime working group with the hotel council, sf travel, union square alliance and fisherman's wharf and organized labor and ufcw. it is actually coordinated effort to take goods. often times reselling them on the marketplace on the internet. then we see them also playing itself out on the streets. i know you will hear today from

merchants that say brick and mortar merchants are having businesses under mined. it adds to environment of unsafe and being in an environment that is largely unregulated. go to any location you hear today the plaza, mission, all over san francisco in my district. you will see items with store labels still on them. they will have the name of the businesses on them. talking to chief scott, the work they have done following up on the goods they end up flea markets, swap meets. at least from my effort this grew out of the work we were doing in the retail crime working group. the mayor was engaged on this. i want to thank ivy leo behalf

of the mayor's office. supervisor ronan is going to speak about this from the perspective of her district in such an aggressive way. we see certain street vendors selling. we have our own regulated. ones that want to sell their own art and jewelry and goods. this is a positive thing for the city. we have created a framework a simple process. i know the fees are waived in year one. we have the opportunity to bring people in and do this in a very straightforward manner. that street vending should be encouraged. all of the other things we talked about today already when you have the resale of stolen items this is something to unmine and create a sense of lawlessness and under mines

brick and mortar and businesses. it is not good for our overall environment. today this will allow for the public works department to give citations. this will be something that will be a lot of education involved in talking to folks. we won't be targeting people that are out there trying to start a business. this is not about shutting down people's opportunity to be entrepreneurs. it is about targeting the efforts toward areas where we see stolen items resold. that is why we purposely chose the department of public works to be involved in this conversation. later in the conversation we can talk about the bla report and what public works put forward what they believe they need in terms of staffing to support this effort given the hearing we had on the funded unfilled public works position we believe

there is a way to staff this up in the right way and get it done. as i said, really i want to thank everyone involved. it creates a framework for the process for applicants that want to do positive street vending. there will be asked for proof of ownership of goods. the intersection of the department of public works will work with community-based organizations to do outreach and education. that is what we are trying to do for those positively involved in what this work is. there will be no criminal penalties. this is administrative fines. we are going to focus on areas that are hotspots. un plaza is an area talked about extensively. we need to make sure that that is an area that is regulated and in good fashion. just want to thank everyone involved in this. thank you to ivy and supervisor

ronan. you have been dealing with this on a daily basis for the last year or more. supervisor haney you see this on a daily basis. we feel this is a positive step. it is something to make a difference. we intend to ensure that it is implemented in a good way with the department of public works. with that i will turn it back to you, mr. chair. we can talk about the bla's analysis of what the department of public works put forward in the conversation. evevey lee is -- ivy lee is here from the mayor's office. >> chair haney: i want to let supervisor ronan make introductory comments and then move to the presentation. welcome.

>> supervisor ronen: colleagues, i will ask for your support. the mission district is dealing with dirty and crowded and chaotic streets. the major contributor is street vending. the open sale of stolen goods. a walk down mission street you would see all kinds of merchandise being sold on the street under cutting the small mom and pop stores. i have had small business owners calling me crying. vendors are selling products at half price and blocking entryway to their business and don't have a competitive edge because they are not paying rent or business taxes. these mom and pop businesses are usually on mission street run by immigrants, latin x owners who

barely survived the pandemic. in collaboration with the mayor's we crafted this legislation to strike that between providing economic opportunity, access to goods for low income and preventing sale of stolen mer chanzeiss on our streets. the goal is to stop people from selling stolen goods. not punish immigrant street vendors. my office has been working with community-based organizations and mayor's office through i vy lee to provide storefrontses and safe spaces for vendors to sell goods in an order leeway off the city streets. the legislation creates permit

process for street vendors. built into the legislation a requirement for low access -- low barrier access to the process, language access, outreach and education about the new ordinance. we have included community suggestions that are acceptable through organizations who know and work with vendors already. only folks selling new and labeled items will be required to provide proof of ownership so we do not interrupt the sale of good uses. they may be reduced based on the individual's ability to pay. 48 hour opportunity to chair any violation before confiscation takes place. we hope this will have an impact on the streets to stop illegal vending, provide economic opportunity and help small

businesses. i want to thank the mayor's office and especially i vy lee and my office who worked extensively with mission economic development agency. the american indian district, small business commission and receiving and implementing input and presentation in the process. i want to thank you, ivy lee for introducing substitute legislation. it has been a true pleasure working with you. thank you, supervisor safai for your support and cosponsorship. i asked the city attorney to make a small friendly amendment to require public works to don nit confridayscatessed goods to

organizations serving unhoused after the 90 day period where individuals can recoup their goods if they are able to provide proof of ownership. the amendment has been circulated to the committee. i would ask you perhaps, supervisor safai, if you would introduce these amendments. thank you for your support. the last thing i will say is that we are the tenderloin, mission, bayview, castro, we are dealing with some of the most difficult conditions in our streets. we want our communities where low-income people live to feel vibrant and safe and healthy. in order to do this we need to constantly strike a balance between making sure we help individuals in dire need of help. people with very low income trying to make a buck.

undocumented immigrants without a lot of opportunities. homeless battling mental health and addiction issues. we have to balance needs with the needs of everyone else trying to live and make it in the street. it is not easy balance to strike. we are constantly battling to get it right. we will continue that battle. i have to say afternoon this is both santiago and myself who worked closely on this legislation. i appreciate all of us who are trying to constantly struggle to strike that right balance. we never want to criminalize poverty. we never want to make live more difficult for people whose lives are so difficult to begin with. we also have to protect small mom and pop businesses and kids in our neighborhoods that are

just trying to live their lives and want to feel like they are part of healthy neighborhoods. i am going to be in the struggle in the balancing act as long as i am on this board of supervisors. we won't always get it perfect. please no that is at the top of our consciousness as we try to introduce measures to make life better for all. with that again thank you. i am looking forward to hearing your presentation. >> welcome. >> thank you so much, chair haney. i want to really express my respect and gratitude for the leadership of this board.

specifically supervisors safai, ronen and peskin. the smart legislation was the model that we based this legislation upon. we owe him a measure of thanks for that groundwork. i really want to second what supervisors ronen and safai stated. this was a true collaborrakes. we have lessons learned from an effort multiyear effort in district nine to create this balanced approach. we tried to look at communications, i want to give thanks to your partner and your

current staff of your offices, supervisors for their partnership. the supervisors laid out the key points of this legislation. it is an attempt to conserve the economic activity for those who legitimately want to pursue it may being it as streamlined and low barrier as possible and try to incentivize and help those who want to come in to compliance. i won't repeat what the supervisors have described. this does not apply to food or street artists. that would be an attack on immigrants that is not what this is about. it was never about that.

thank you both for making that very clear as well. supervisor, chair haney i hope this is also an assistance for your district and the families of the tenderloin who rely on the farmer's market. that is one reason we made the union plaza a free area. we need to protect that farmer's market. they are the largest distributor of the ppp benefits in the country. it serves the 30,000 residents of your district, chair haney as the only place where they can actually obtain flesh edgetables, -- fresh vegetables and fruit. that is a key priority for us. i want to thank the department of public works. they have put in the time and

work and the last thing we want to do is to give them a mandate. we want them to succeed. we want the c.e.o.s that are critical partners in this. we want it to succeed. i will stop there and see if there are any questions from the committee members. many thanks for making this a true partnership. it was a pleasure to work with your offices. i appreciate your work and bringing everyone together and thoughtful about what would help to address what is a serious challenge in my district but across the city. we want to do it in a way that provides health and safety and support for the street vendors and communities and

neighborhoods and small businesses. i think this approach does strike that balance. supervisor mar. >> thank you. i want to express appreciation to everyone involved in there thoughtful and important legislation. thanks to ivy and the mayor's team and supervisor ronan and supervisor safai for your support and contribution. really, we appreciate the work that went into trying to find the right balance in this new framework for street vending and address multiple very important issues and goals to excellence. great to see this. i would love to be added as a

cosponsor. >> chair haney: thank you. we have a couple other folks to present. bla report on this. >> thank you, chair haney. we have a report on this legislation. it would do a number of things including the public works code to regulate street vending. authorize permit fees and enforcement actions and the sf tax regulation code, parks code and police codes to conform with those changes. to merge the permit program with the new public works permit program. as we show on page 27 of the report. public works does estimate it would require 13.8 f.t.e. positions to implement this new regulatory scheme. this legislation doesn't increase the public works

budget. we will review staffing and budget changes during the mayor's proposed budget on supplemental appropriations that show they are reasonable relative to the requirements here. i think it is worth pointing out as you think about designs of the program. they have piloted a scheme similar to this. what staff found with the port commission. this enforcement worked best when it was paired with law enforcement action. in addition to that ones the enforcement was withdrawn from a certain area street vendors quickly returned. it does appear to be staffing intensive and requires constant attention when you think about resources needed.

we consider approval for the board of supervisors. this is a new program. happy to answer any questions. >> chair haney: thank you. >> supervisor ronen: thank you so much for the report and just choosing on that. number one, and i guess this is a question. i didn't realize this is the first time that from the bla report i learned this legislation was modeled after supervisor peskin's legislation. thank you, supervisor peskin for providing the example. supervisor peskin's legislation was anybody empowered with confiscating items? as much as it makes me uncomfortable and took a little while more me to get used to and

feel comfortable with confiscating new items, and mind be you new items. not confiscating used item. that feels to me what the difference and the thing to make this successful. because as ivy stated, my office spent an enormous amount of time and energy and it didn't work. the reason it didn't work was, a, it was staffed out of my office which was unrealistic given we have three staffs at the time. i have to recognize the incredible job with that. it was also because there wasn't that enforcement component.

it didn't work. people were still selling good on the street. same at the port. if police were there they pack up. when police left they put goods out again. it didn't work. i think the thing that distinguishes this legislation is for new goods with no proof of ownership in which many cases they are stolen goods. if we interrupt at least in the mission at the bart station it is an entire huge operation for trucks come unload the goods. people take them and sell them and are exported in many situations. we have heard reports. if we confiscate those goods that will interrupt the operation and be able to distinguish between individuals that are trying to make an extra buck selling used items versus entire organized crime

operation. that is one question. number two. as the soon to be new chair of the committee i can assure you that this request or need of the department of public works will be a priority of mine. i know it is for the mayor as well. we absolutely intend to properly fund this. as ivy lee said it is not worth doing this unless it is set up for success. we are serious about this and it needs to work. my constituents are fed up with the chaos in the streets of the mission for the past year. >> chair haney: thank you. >> i want to defer that question. i believe there are several representatives of the court

here to shed light on that. i want to emphasize that we don't want the police to expand their footprint as far as policing situations that don't require it on the spot. we have to tip the function and not have them do the functions that. [indiscernable] on alternative city budgets. that being said, i agree with you the reality is that we have to have sure and certain consequences that everyone understands in order for this to work. we don't want something that just sounds good on paper. this has to work on the ground.

in the mission especially they have reached out and told us they barely survive. now it is a challenge. we have to support them. we have to associate with other city departments in confiscation if there is any threat to city worker's safety. we do not want to emphasize or lead with that. >> chair haney: supervisor safai then folks on the floor. supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: since the bla responded now. having worked with the department of public works and had this hearing on 500 plus funded but vacant positions. i think we will have a very interesting conversation. we want to have this successful.

there is going to be department of public works is going to have to think about who they are -- what other departments they need in conjunction. some of the positions that were put forward, public information officer, inspector are all full-time positions. it is not clear and we can have this further conversation in the budget if this will be required to be full-time assigned 14 people doing this type of work or there will be overlap for some of the other work they are doing. it might be in the beginning as the bla said to be effective in certain areas. i imagine there is overlap with the other work they are doing. i want be to point that out. department has a 32% vacancy right now with funded positions. it is something we talked about in the hearing. we will continue to work with

public works on that. most likely some of the positions that need filled can overlap with the objective of this. as ms. lee said on behalf of the mayor's office and supervisor ronan. this is going to be one of the highest priorities for me. we have the first piece of legislation we did. 10a is almost done. m.o.u. is being negotiated. that will allow additional law enforcement presence by private entities in certain areas. that will have an effect. as ms. lee said we want to lead with department of public works. there are going to be areas of violent individuals with a vested interest in seeing this continue. we are going to have to think about coordinating those efforts to ensure we suppress that. that unfortunately is driving some of the violence and sense

of uncertainty. particularly un plaza. we are specifically stating un plaza is going to be vendor free except for vendor's market. that will take accordsnated effort. we will continue to have those conversations at the budget process. i am committed to working with the chair and public works and the mayor's office to get this right. 14 brand new positions on top of 500 vacant is probably not the path forward to take. i just want to thank jeffrey who left my office who put a lot of time and effort into working on our organized retail crime group and 10a legislation and now working with ivy and supervisor ronan's office.

thank you, ayevey for highlighting supervisor peskin. we did see they were similar language he used. supervisor ronan. a lot of brick and mortar businesses were under mined people selling alcohol and all different types of things in front of existing businesses struggling through what we have all known they were struggling through. i just want be to thank the members of the organized retail crime working group. we talked about concrete solutions. chief scott was the chair with with me. california retailers, sf travel, ufcw, local 5, and council of district merchants, fisherman's wharf, sheriff's department and a host of other folks and

community-based organizations interested in seeing this. as you said, ivy, grocery stores. i went up to see. businesses like that that work on small margins to have people come and steal. they lost in one day people coming in to one of their stores 9,000 worth of alcohol. that sometimes can make-or-break whether or not these businesses stay open. what you see the tags on it straight out of the box they are selling openly. we have to make this a top priority. from what i heard today it is great to collaborate with supervisor ronan and take mayor's office.

thank you, chair haney. this is step one in implementation is most important part to make this effective and how we are able to suppress this type of theft. while at the same time to all of your points. respecting the folks out there trying to start their businesses and be entrepreneurs. they are the ones we are getting a simple permit to allow them to remain in accident and the ones in criminal activity we are going to drive them out of business. >> i have a couple questions how this will be dealt with. we have talked about this about some of the different types of challenges we have around street vending in my district. there are folks who are

residents of the district who are often older who go and sell small amounts of goods for sub assistance. particularly around un plaza. i understand why we don't want them to do that. how are we also providing service and support to those individuals? they may have a blanket and food or other things. these aren't the folk we are most concerned about. how are we going to support them, particularly if we stopping them? >> chair haney, thank you for

the question. i think that is the approach we want to take. that is one built off the best practices. we have community-based groups culturally competent that are for this outreach to folks that we are trying to bring into compliance. the elderly self-help has assisted to the chinese speaking seniors selling food, packaged food especially that for some additional supplement to their income. that is not the target. we are talking about folks that are stealing and blocking walkways where pedestrians have

to walk in traffic to get around them. they do need to understand that kind of activity is not going to be allowed in un plaza. we have to be fair and equitable. we have to outreach in a way they can understand. if that is what we hope to do with this legislation to have that kind of proactive community-based outreach that recognizes what folk need to understand what is happening and how they are coming by it. >> chair haney: i would say i know we talked about some of the staffing that is needed around enforcement. i hope that and i know for the budget committee and incoming budget chair that i hope we look at and the mayor's office opportunities to fund services and outreach workers and other

folks who can help with that as well in addition to the enforcement. i understand that there needs to be a focus on support. for people who are selling the goods for basic sub assistance making sure they are connected to the right organizations so we are addressing the charges of poverty mott motivating what we are seeing out there. >> supervisor ronen: i appreciate this very much. we are going to be launching this legislation at the same time where we create opportunities for vendors to come insides and sell goods. i am a big believer you can't do enforcement if you are not

providing alter mat spaces for people to be and engage in activities related to poverty. this week, for example, william artise on the board ofmeta rents a storefront the mission street where they will allow vendors to sell their goods. ms. lee has been working to add money in the budget that will pay for the represent of the spaces where vendors can come to sell goods. this is the good piece that worked. that is how we are doing this. combining the best of the support permitting scheme and hoping that together they will be really successful. as i said in my opening remarks.

it is this really difficult balancing act that we are trying to get right because you are absolutely right, chair haney. at the bottom of this is poverty. you need to provide people that look to survive. this is the forefront of our mind as we put this piece of legislation into practice. we are working on both sides simultaneously. enforcement to provide alternatives for people. >> thank you. i appreciate that. your focus on it and also the work your office has done to provide us with models and some ways that we explore how to do

this right and build on it. thank you for that. there are seppentives from the office of racial equity here to answer questions. they don't have a presentation is that correct? great. colleagues, any other questions or comments before we go to public comment? we will open up for public comment. one minute each for speakers. mr. clerk, if you could open the line for public comment. >> clerk: operations is checking for callers. members who wish to comment press star 3 now to be added to the line to speak. if you are on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. that will be your queue to

comment for one minute as the chair indicated. are there any callers? >> i am with the partners owners and managers of 1128 market. 10 un plaza. we are urging the board of supervisors to amends this ordinance. illegal stolen goods market impacts our ability to bring employers to the building. companies have concern about safety and well-being. they are looking for office space elsewhere. please make there are amendment so the stolen goods can be addressed. please help us get and bring badly needed employers and jobs to the mid marketsive rick center areas.

thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good morning. i am marla sandler with the civic center community benefit district. the primary concern for un plaza when we have been unable to bring free community events to the plaza. it has been a welcoming public space for lunchtime concerts. it is now unsafe and threatening place to be. people returning to work and local residents and visitors eager to participate in public life. it is time to reclaim this vital public space for you will. the cbd's ability to program community events, hallmark what we do, is stiflinged. we are calls an artists. they are not comfortable.

union plaza must be safe for free community activities to breathe life in the city. we are hopeful the proposed street vendor regulations are not only henry claim the safety for all butdry indicate an accessible pathway for those who seek to sell their wares. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> i am jessica. i am calling from the san francisco travel association to support this legislation. this will prevent the sale of stolen merchandise and allow those that rely on street vending to make ends meet. it is a unique experience. we want all street vendors to comply with health and safety

standards. it will be critical to ensure this legislation is effective. we hope this is addressing the challenges of negative street vending. >> next speaker, please. >> first and foremost, i think we should stop money. we should stop the definition of street vendors. original vendors have a lot of problems. original street vendors at one

time veterans for free. they were given a card. they paid no vendor fees. why are you encouraging flea markets on our streets? smart businesses. you should be ashamed of yourselves. the citizens on san bruno. become focused omission and flea market make the entire mission street a flea market area. whatever, you know, from 14th street or whatever. >> thank you. sorry could cut anybody off. i am timing each speaker at one

minute. next speaker, please. >> good morning, committee, supervisors. christian with ufcw local 64 64 will 8. we are in support of this bill to help the businesses in san francisco and our members working in old businesses. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> david pill plow. i have not been following closely. i have a concern about the street artist program that this apparently amend the street artist program. there is a permit and scheme there. i would suggest looking at that or at least having some relationship between the two. i am concerned about how this might impact the port in

bringing the public works program and port program together and i would want to hear concerns from the port on that and just suggest that this should be carefully worked through both the regulatory and enforcement piece so there is harmony and consistency. thanks for listening. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> i work at the college of law. i live in east bay and take bart to the civic center station and walk through un plaza to get to work. i support the proposed ordinance. overdue. that is working the way towards the board of supervisors eventually. we were saddened to learn of the

recent shooting of one of our urban peacekeepers in the past 10 days. something has to be done to support those individuals and others who work and live within the vicinity of un plaza and this part of the tenderloin including those trying to get to work safely and peacefully to serve others and pay taxes to support the critical safety net that so many need and deserve in this day and age. i believe those tax dollars should be spent to support a safe community. the laws are enforced and not ignored. in this case when the stolen goods market is obvious through mid market and union plaza daily unfair to local merchants.

>> provides $2 million in fruits and vegetable vouchers to purchase produce. in the past two years the pandemic led to a significant deterioration of conditions grounding the plaza. drug dealers and users. it is a sleeping village and illegal stolen sale of goods. >> daily we field complaints from customers and vendors

complaining of harassment and aggression. for the first time we fear for the survival of this neighborhood institution. we support this legislation. >> sorry to cut you off. thank you so much for your comments. >> next speaker, please. i am calling in to support the swift passage. it.

>> this legislation makes it for street vendors struggling with existing complex funding. the legislation centralizes the funding. it is not going to putter merchants not -- to putter merchants not selling illegal goods. please advance this legislation and fight for this. communities across our city need us. thank you. >> do we have in more callers? >> no further callers in the queue. >> thank you, mr. chair. >> chair haney: thank you for everyone. i know this was a community process that involves a lot of folks coming in including some of the farmers market leaders and leaders from the small business community be that called in from my district.

thank you for your leadership. supervisor safai and ronen. anything more to add? i know there are. >> it would be good for supervisor ronan to explain be the amendments. i am looking over them now. if you could give it to us. i am happy to move that. >> supervisor ronen: sure. yes. on page 8. i am adding calling it inspecting agency instead of department provides at least 48 hours notice. that is just making sure. on page 13 line 9. just adding the process for

selecting organizations to accept donated goods pursuant to 5.9. clarifying and then the additional language about the donation on page 21. adding the language if the vendor filed written appeal pursuant to 86 and not resolved within 90 days department shall store vendors items until april peel resolved to allow vendor t recover items. after 90 days or soon as resolved the department shall donate nonfood items to organizations providing services to people unhoused. prior to making donations the department shall adopt regulations governing the process for selecting organizations to accept donated goods. nonfood items is because we don't think food items should be

confiscated in these circumstances. >> food banks or places where they might not have proof of ownership. we are thinking that to the extent that public works is recovering toothpaste and laundry detergent these are desperately needed, under wear and stocks by people experiencing homelessness. we want to minimize cost of storing goods for a long period of time. we want to make sure those goods get to people that need them in the city. >> thank you for bringing that forward. supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: i am just seeing this. what if there aren't any

organizations that want to accept in i imagine there will be a list. what if an organization says we are good. we don't need this? does this allow flexibility for the department to be able to do something other than give donate the items to organizations that might be willing to accept them? >> it is really hard for me to imagine with the hundreds of organizations providing services in the city to people experiencing homelessness that we are not able to find organizations to accept the materials. if we do we can amend later. it feels like that. >> supervisor safai: i think you are right. if you are talking about deodorant or that kind of stuff. other items noncosmetic related supporting people that are --

electronics or whatever it may be. it seems as though there should be some flexibility. >> if you look shall donate nonfood items to those not housed as appropriate. that as appropriate takes care of that. >> i am seeing it for the first time. that is what i needed to see. where is the as appropriate. in the blue? >> yes. >> i see it. got it. perfect. okay. motion to adopt those amendments, mr. chair. >> chair haney: we will close public comment. i will close public comment

first. >> clerk: public comment is now closed. >> chair haney: now motion to accept amendments. roll call vote, please. >> clerk: motion to accept amendments stated by supervisor ronan. safai. >> aye. >> mari no longer see him. >> haney aye. >> member marabsent. two ayes. member mar absent. >> chair haney: the minutes are adopted. final words from anyone before the vote? thank you again for your work. i would love to be added as cosponsor. thank you for your leadership.

with that i want to make a motion to move to the full board with positive recommendation as amended. roll call vote, please. >> on that motion to forward to the full board with positive recommendation as amended. vice chair safai. >> aye. member mar. >> chair haney. >> aye. member mar. absent. we have two ayes with member marabsent. >> thank you so ever. appreciate it. we know he supported it because he asked to be a on cosponsor. all right. please call item 10. hearing on the staffing

shortages at san francisco general hospital. how members of the hospital who wish to comment call 415-655-0001. id24958561232. pound twice if you haven't done so. dial star 3 to line up to speak. system prompt will indicate you raised your hand rate until you are unmuted to comment. mr. chair. >> chair haney: we are going to continue this item. before we do that we open up for public comment please. >> clerk: we are checking for caller in the queue. members of the public to comment on continuance of this item press star three now. for those on hold please continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. that will be yourque.

any callers? >> no caller in the queue. >> mr. chair. >> chair haney: all right. public comment is closed. motion to continue this hearing to the march 23rd meeting of the budget and finance committee. can we have a roll call vote on that please. >> motion to continue this hearing to march 13th meeting of budget and finance. safai. >> aye. >> mar. chair haney. >> aye. >> member mar. absent. we have two ayes. member maris absent. >> chair haney: all right. mr. clerk, do we have other items in front of us? >> clerk: that concludes the business for the budget and finance committee, mr. chair. >> chair haney: this meeting is

adjourned. thank you. women's network for sustainable future . >> san francisco streets and puffs make up 25 percent of cities e city's land area more than all the parks combined they're far two wide and have

large flight area the pavement to parks is to test the variants by ininexpensive changing did new open spaces the city made up of streets in you think about the potential of having this space for a purpose it is demands for the best for bikes and families to gather. >> through a collaborative effort with the department we the public works and the municipal transportation agency pavement to parks is bringing initiative ideas to our streets. >> so the face of the street is the core of our program we have in the public right-of-way meaning streets that can have areas perpetrated for something else. >> i'm here with john francis pavement to parks manager and

this parklet on van ness street first of all, what is a parklet and part of pavement to parks program basically an expense of the walk in a public realm for people to hang anti nor a urban acceptable space for people to use. >> parklets sponsors have to apply to be considered for the program but they come to us you know saying we want to do this and create a new space on our street it is a community driven program. >> the program goes beyond just parklets vacant lots and other spaces are converted we're here at playland on 43 this is place is cool with loots things to do and plenty of space to play so we came up with that idea to

revitalizations this underutilized yard by going to the community and what they said want to see here we saw that everybody wants to see everything to we want this to be a space for everyone. >> yeah. >> we partnered with the pavement to parks program and so we had the contract for building 236 blot community garden it start with a lot of jacuzzi hammers and bulldozer and now the point we're planting trees and flowers we have basketball courts there is so much to do here. >> there's a very full program that they simply joy that and meet the community and friends and about be about the lighter side of city people are more

engaged not just the customers. >> with the help of community pavement to parks is reimagining the potential of our student streets if you want more information visit them as the pavement to parks or contact pavement to parks at sfgovtv.org >> good afternoon. this meeting will come to order. welcome to the march 7, 2022, regular meeting of the land use & transportation committee of

the board of supervisors in supervisor. i'm myrna melgar joined by dean preston and aaron peskin. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? are we going to have to do it over from the beginning? >> yes. >> chair: let me know. >> is the ... they can't hear us

on teams.

>> chair: good afternoon. everyone. sorry for the late start. we were having technical difficulties. welcome to the regular meeting of the land use & transportation committee. i'm supervisor myrna melgar joined by dean preston and

supervisor peskin. i would like to thank the staff for staffing this meeting. >> clerk: we are convening hybrid meetings that allow in-person attendance and public comment. the board recognizes that equity access is essential and will be taking public comment as follows. first, public comment will be taken on each item on this agenda. those attending in person will be allowed to speak first and then those on the telephone line. for those watching online, the number is streaming across the screen. the number is 415-655-0001 the meeting i.d. is 2482 697 5972

and press # and # again. you will be hearing the discussions but in mute and in listening level only. if you are on your telephone, please turn down your telephone. as indicated, we will take public comment from those attending in person first and then we will go to our public comment comment line. alternatively, you may submit public comment to myself erica.major@sfgov.org . you can also send public comments to our office

city hall 1 dr. carlton b. goodlett place san francisco, ca 94102-4689 >> chair: we still host hybrid meetings so folks can call in. just a friendly reminder, please keep your face coverings on at all times while speaking. if seated in the chamber, please offer inadequate spacing for those around you while lining up and sitting. for today's meeting, please note that we will be calling items 2 and 3 together and items 4, 5, and 6 together. please pay close attention to the clerk's announcement so you know when to place yourself in the queue.

every speaker will be granted two minutes each during public comment. we'll make sure this announcement is repeated later in the meeting. thanks all for your patience while we ease into this new world of hybrid meetings. madam clerk, please call item number 1. >> clerk: item 1 is ordinance amending the administrative and public works codes to urge departments to review permits within 30 days, limit until april 1, 2023 the issuance of fines for violations of shared spaces requirements except to enforce access requirements for persons with disabilities or first responder personnel, pedestrian and vehicular safety, and removal of abandoned structures, and directing departments to wind down the temporary program no later than march 31, 2023, subject to earlier termination of the local emergency; affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act. members who would like to speak for item 1 should call the number on the screen, 415-655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 2482 697 5972 and then press # and # again. if you have not done so, press

star 3 to speak. the system will have a prompt that you have raised your hand. that is your confirmation to know that you have raised your hand. >> chair: supervisor peskin, would you like to make remarks? >> no, madam chair, we discussed this at our last meeting and there was one item that was substantive. if there are any members of the public who would like to comment, great. and if we want to send this to the full board with full recommendation and hopefully all's well that ends woman comment. >> chair: thank you, supervisor. supervisor preston. >> thank you, chair melgar. i want to thank planning for answering some of our questions this last week. there were three areas of inquiry. two of them i got answers on.

the third i might want to get a little more clarity. we asked about some of the physical safety requirements to make sure that those remained intact and enforceable at parklets and were provided information in relation to that. the same with bus stops and transit use and making sure that was prioritized and nothing here would impede that. the third one and if mr. loz is available for question, i did want to talk about an issue that was very important to the board. it was something that both director peskin and i raised in the original version in committee which is on the issue of public access to the parklet spaces. in particular, the compromised -- that the board came up with around ensuring that there was a publicly available bench in the parklet

as well as access from 10:00 p.m. or midnight until 7:00 a.m. to be closed and other parts of the day the parklet would be open. i'm trying to sort out the intact of this ordinance on those requirements. and if you could maybe just address that. i do your response. i've also been trying to clarify this with the city attorney. my understanding is there are parklets operating under the temporary emergency permits and those under the permanent program. can you just describe the applicability of the public access requirements to those parklets currently and how it would changes under this, if at all. >> this is robin abod with the planning department shared spaces program. the current code established

public access provisions for parklets once the pandemic program sunsetting. these were provisions that included making sure there was a public bench available at all times to non-patrons of the parklet as well as to others. so that provision was set to commence once the pandemic program finished and this codified program took over. that sunset date was established at june 30, 2022, a bit later this fiscal year. you're contemplating this committee anyway at this time. hopefully the full board is contemplating pushing that sunset date for the pandemic program to a later time, at which provisions like the public access provision would commence. the idea was that we were trying to allow park sponsors to maximize commercial use of their

parklet during this time to try to recover revenue and keep people employed and so forth. in doing that we would allow full use of the parklet for that use and revert back to these new public provisions once the economy and covid is stable. >> and so are all of the parklets currently -- other than the pre-existing parklets from before the pandemic, are all of them operating under the pandemic parklets rules or are some applied to the permanent program and under those rules? >> currently all parklet operators are operating under a permit so they're not compelled by code to provide this publicly accessible bench, though they may. the city is not requiring them to do so at this time. once folks apply for a

legislated permit, which is something we can issue once the pandemic program sunsets, then they would be subject to that provision of the public access. >> thank you. is there any reason -- obviously there's certain things we've carved out here for accessibility concerns and other things that supervisor peskin's amendments address. i'm curious why we are not insisting that the public access part -- which i think was a pretty important part of the discussions on passage of this, is there any policy -- i mean, obviously a policy choice for the board, but i'm just curious if there's any practical reason why we would not stick with our june 30 or july 1 date to require that businesses make the

parklet have a bench that's available to the general public as well as be open during the specified hours. >> supervisor, i think that is definitely a policy consideration for the committee and the board. it was really clear coming out of the last time that we came to the board to legislate this in the summer and more recently the a.d.a. accessibility fire safe issues were of the utmost urgency and importance. you've codified that in the legislation that moved forward at that time. the public access provision wasn't something that rose to, at least in the discourse here at the board to setting a different, effective date for. >> okay. thank you for clarifying. so i do think it's significant. i am concerned with bumping that out potentially up to about a

year down the road. i just don't see the reason and i'm concerned that once folks get used to those rules, not just the year or two under the pandemic, but another year going forward potentially, that that could de facto become the permanent state of affairs. i think this is something that was important to our legislative discussions on this. i do apologize, i don't have a specific amendment on this. it was something i was engaged with the attorney's office with just today to try to get clarity on this and i understand the deputy city attorney leading on this may or may not be available or has not been up until now. i'm not sure if colleagues have thoughts on that. i would like to see us sticking with the original date around the public access provisions of this that would require an amendment that unless i get a

different indication from our deputy city attorneys, i don't know whether that can be prepared on the fly during this hearing. i'm seeing shaking heads. aside from the practical, procedural issue, i would be curious, colleagues, if you would be amenable to that type of amendment or see the policy issue differently. >> you're the sponsor of this legislation. i think that was for you. >> thank you, madam chair, through the chair to supervisor preston. just a few high-level thoughts in this ever-evolving field of public policy that is, as we have said many times we're learning how to fly the plane as we're building it and that continues to be the case. what i felt in these amendments

after an unfortunate series of what seemed like high-handed enforcement actions during omicron wherein the department of public works and the mayor's office -- how should i say it nicely? -- were not coordinating and not be consistent with the legislation, decided to fix it with this fix, wherein i think what we're saying is two things as it relates to the issue that you brought up, which i -- as policy matters support. one is highest priority a.d.a. access, fire access, public safety. number two, we're really relying in this interim period of small businesses doing the right thing. i would prefer a tweak. i prefer as a matter of timing

if not substantive to do it at the full board if it could be deemed in concept to be non-substantive, but will defer to the city attorney on that. >> deputy city attorney ann pearson. we've had only a very short time to look at this. and d.c.a. yang who drafted this legislation is not available. my hunch is that if the amendment were to extend the program out subject to compliance with the public access provision, i don't think that would be substantive. but it's hard to make that call without seeing the amendment and without hearing any of the issues that d.c.a. yang might raise, so i can't make any promises. >> this non-lawyer feels like it wouldn't be substantive because it would -- insofar as you just said, deputy city attorney, through the chair, that it is an extension, it feels like it wouldn't be substantive, but

ultimately that is the city attorney's call. up to this panel whether we send it out today and try to amend it at the full board if that language were forthcoming between now and the 15th or whether we keep it here for another week. >> through the chair, i'm happy to send it forward. i think it probably would be non-substantive. if for any reason it were different, we could handle it at the board and deal with the extra week there, in the unlikely event it was deemed substantive. >> thank you, supervisors. i just want to say thank you so much, supervisor peskin and your staff, for stepping up in the moment to try to intervene and make something that we were -- an airplane that we were flying and fixing at the same time and also engaging the multiple

stakeholders and especially folks in the seniors and disability communities. so i really appreciate that and thank you, mr. bode, for your hard work and grace and elegance through this very messy period. i would like to be added as a co-sponsor, please. do you want to make a motion, supervisor peskin? >> public comment. >> chair: i'm sorry, of course. public comment. we'll start with folks who are here. >> clerk: if you would like to speak for item 1. no public comment in person. members of the public who would like to make public comment for item 1 remotely, please call in to 415-655-0001, the meeting i.d. is 2482 697 5972. operations is checking to see how many callers we have in the queue. it looks like we have 15

listeners with no callers in the queue, madam chair. >> chair: public comment is now closed. now, supervisor peskin. >> i would like to make a motion and thank you for your co-sponsorship, chair melgar, to send this item to the full board with positive recommendation, noting we may have an amendment to consider at the full board of supervisors next tuesday a week from tomorrow. >> chair: madam clerk, please call the roll. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: you have three ayes. >> chair: that motion passes. madam clerk, so now we call items 2 and 3 together, please. >> clerk: item 2 is an

ordinance amending the planning code to revise the definition of group housing; affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act; and making findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101.1, and findings of public necessity, convenience, and welfare under planning code, section 302. ordinance amending the planning code to create the group housing special use district; affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act; and making findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101.1, and findings of public necessity, convenience, and welfare under planning code, section 302. members of the public who want to speak, please call 415-655-0001 and the meeting i.d. is 2482 697 5972. press # and # again and the system will indicate when it's your turn your hand is raised to speak. >> chair: supervisor, the floor is yours. >> thank you. you'll recall at last week's discussion we talked about and updated the group housing definition which came on the heels of pretty significant analysis by planning and our staff there as well as the california college of the arts,

which issued a 300-plus-page report outlining reforms and recommendations for successful group housing models, which is included in the staff report. i want to thank the city attorney's office, the deputy attorney as well as those at planning, particularly my chief of staff for all of their work. i think they've really done a fabulous job coming up with best practices based on best practices that affirm the original intent of giving developers really specific benefits in exchange for shared stewardship and resident building on site. as a quick reminder, the amendments we adopted last week based off the planning commission and staff's recommendations included increasing the common space

requirement to a half square foot of common space for every square foot of private space. we required at least one kitchen within 15% of the common areas, revised the minimum number of kitchens to be one communal kitchen for every 15 group housing rooms and declared that non-permanent residency providers such as ronald mcdonald house that provide temporary housing to families with housing elsewhere is exempt from the requirements in the proposed definition. i would like to ask, subject to public comment, that we move this legislation to the full board with recommendation and thank you both for your consideration. >> chair: thank you so much, supervisor peskin. i would like to be added as a co-sponsor to item 3, please. and also i would like to very much thank you and your staff

for this. our crazy, wonderful city is always evolving and sometimes things happen in the evolution of our urban landscape that need to be shaped in the way that protects the most vulnerable particularly in chinatown and the tenderloin. this is a great motion and i thank your staff for it. let's take public comment. >> clerk: are there any members of the public -- >> i didn't realize you called 3. let me speak a little bit to item 3. >> chair: i'm sorry. >> my apologies for not catching that. later today, as evidenced by the arrival of supervisor mandelman

we will talk about how to incentivize residential housing production, particularly in parts of the city that are less dense. but as a supervisor who represents, indeed, the densest supervisoratorial district, i wanted to highlight the housing tipology and group housing in neighborhoods like chinatown, the densest part of the densest district as well as the tenderloin which i represent the northern portion. both of these neighborhoods have a very high concentration of group housing projects with s.r.o. use characteristics that have historically been the last option for deeply permanent affordable housing, and s.r.o.s have long the very low-income workforce. and later served double

multigenerational immigrant families. in recent years these s.r.o.s converted to dorm style for millennial workers who can pay higher rents and not looking for long-term residency. additionally we've seen new market rate s.r.o.s without having to concede to the livability and public benefit requirements required for a traditional dwelling units. neighborhoods like chinatown have fought for step-up housing in the limited developable sites that remain in these neighborhoods, which would provide affordable housing exits from s.r.o.s for our working families and doubled up families. the lack of developable space within these very dense and

largely built-out neighborhoods to me means we should put a priority on the space -- on using the space for the need of the community. this means larger units with more amenities for families and new affordable construction that is a.d.a. compliant for seniors and disabled residents. all of these residents would be eligible for neighborhood preference referrals, but if we're only building micro units, then those neighborhood preferences really are rendered meaningless. when the t.o. and chinatown communities came to me months ago after the city's initial unresponsiveness to those concerns, my office i was going to say was happy, but grudgingly agreed to work with them on the special use district that is before us and i'm delighted,

supervisor melgar, that you are co-sponsoring that. it really means a lot. i really want to thank the folks from the tenderloin and chinatown and the advocates at the for her front of this, the tenderloin housing clinic, central city collaborative corporation and we received an e-mail from the san francisco democratic party who weighed in to support this. i have one amendment to offer to insert the words -- thank you, city attorney's office for fixing them this morning: except for an affordable housing project as defined in section 315 (b) and a single residency

unit required by section 41.3 of the hotel conversion ordinance, admin code 4113 at the beginning of that sentence. so i would like to make that amendment. colleagues, given the conversation we're going to have which i don't think is going to be resolved on items 4, 5 and 6 and given the new twists and turns in state law, i would like to send item 2 to the full board with recommendation. and then i would like to make a motion to continue item 3 as amended to the call of the chair until whatever comes out of the 4, 5, 6 discussion is ripe and then send them together. >> chair: that's very generous of you, supervisor peskin.

>> i would send it out now, but madam city attorney is not going to let me. >> chair: let's take public comment on this item. >> clerk: operations is check to see if we have any callers in the queue -- >> chair: it looks like we have a person. >> clerk: i'm sorry. we have an in-person comment. mr. smith. >> thank you very much. good afternoon, supervisors, wonderful to see you all. it's been a bonkers couple of years and great to be back in this beautiful room. me and my comments are requesting that a working group et created. we've been told by our members that the definition is a moratorium on affordable housing. there are some fascinating examples in korea and other countries where you have students living with older adults in the same group housing

facility and one demographic is able to help the other demographic. so we ask that a working group come together before moving forward the definition ordinance. thank you very much. >> chair: thank you, mr. smith. >> clerk: let's move on to remote. we're checking to see how many callers we have. actually, a hand has been raised. >> thank you. did you want to provide comment? >> no. i was just here to represent the planning commission's action on the item. so i'll go ahead and do that?

>> chair: go ahead. i apologize. i'm negotiating between being in person and -- i can't see you raising your hand. go ahead. >> that's quite all right. this is all new for all of us. good afternoon, supervisors, aaron star for the planning department. we heard this on february 10 of this year and unanimously voted for approval. the proposed modifications were to revise the student housing and 100% affordable housing projects and two to exclude the single-room occupancy from this legislation with intent to continue discussions in the future. on the last one it was based on a misunderstanding of an amendment presented. we do thank supervisor peskin for adding the 100% aspect to his ordinance and i am here for any questions you may have.

>> thank you, mr. star r, and again i apologize. madam clerk, can we check if we have public comment on the line? >> clerk: yes, madam chair. >> i am going to translate for the following three s.r.o. families. [speaking alternate language]

[speaking alternate language] [speaking alternate language].

>> good afternoon, supervisors. i support this ordinance to prohibit the building of group housing in chinatown. what we need is affordable housing. my daughter and i live in an s.r.o. unit in chinatown. the room is so small that my daughter has nowhere to do homework or exercise. there is no kitchen in the building. when we need to eat, we have no choice but to cook in my room. cooking smells are everywhere in our room. for myself and my daughter, there is no way to avoid all the cooking smells and steam is trapped in my room and most of my furniture gets moldy. how can this be a good place to

grow up? i hope the city will listen to our suggestion. affordable housing is always something our families and seniors are longing for. once again we need group housing because this can improve our living environment. thank you. we have a second family here. [speaking alternate language].

[speaking alternate language]. >> hello, supervisors. the reason why i'm here today is

to oppose the building of more market housing in chinatown [indiscernible] -- that's why we need you to pass the ordinance in front of you. s.r.o. is a type of group housing and obviously is not suitable for families who live in. with more than 300 families with children under 18 living in such an environment. my family of five lived in an s.r.o. unit for over 10 years. we keep applying for affordable housing, but never the lucky ones. the truth is there is a very strong need for affordable housing in san francisco. why don't we want new s.r.o.s in chinatown? because what chinatown needs is affordable housing. we eat, sleep, exercise all in the same small space with poor ventilation. my kids do homework on the only bed in the room.

without space to exercise, you can see how kids and adults are mentally and physically affected. affordable housing is needed. i really hope we can have more opportunity to move out of this unit. chinatown is the home for new immigrants and low-income families. i hope supervisors can listen to our voice and pass this ordinance, to do more affordable housing in chinatown or near chinatown. thank you. we have one last family here. [speaking alternate language].

[speaking alternate language].

[speaking alternate language]. >> i live in an s.r.o. unit in chinatown. i oppose more s.r.o.s in my neighborhood. in chinatown there are hundreds of families living in the s.r.o. with children under 18. my family of five live in the same s.r.o. the unit is very small. we have no space for my two young children to exercise and play. one of of my kids has autism and

he doesn't like to interact with others. this is very painful. my husband and i work hard. whenever there is an application for housing, we apply for it. [indiscernible] affordable housing however, the reality was even when i was picked, i have no other option. i was extremely disappointed. yes, we want the city to build more housing, more affordable housing with at least a one-bedroom unit to allow families to have a stable place to call home. on the other hand, only one or two affordable housing units apply. i hope the city could do the

right thing for families, to have housing that matches the needs of our families. supervisors, please -- [indiscernible] -- next generation healthy environment. >> clerk: thank you so much. let's take the next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, chair melgar and supervisors. this is ryan patterson representing the san francisco s.r.o. hotel coalition and numerous individual owners of s.r.o.s as well as developers of group housing. we filed written objections this afternoon and extended our previous objections to other files. it is unclear whether this is applying to existing units or

newly proposed units. we would like the staff or sponsor to confirm this today. the teams connection is not working properly so some was inaudible. this affects my clients and should not go to the full board. this would [indiscernible] requiring a quarter of square foot is comparable to an increased open space requirement. this is not allowed by sd 330. there is no evidence that any of the proposed density ordinances under consideration would be sufficient to ensure no net loss. we question the idea that a separate ordinance could constitute a change as required by sd 330.

again, we would like your clarification of whether the proposed ordinance is intended to apply to new versus existing units and thank you very much for your time. >> clerk: thank you. >> madam chair, i just want to make one point for the record. item number 2 was not amended at all today and will be going forward to the full board. the non-substantive amendment that i made to item number 3 will continue to stay in this committee and be subject to another hearing of this committee. >> clerk: let's take the next caller. >> yes. good afternoon, supervisors. my name is mark macey principal of macey architecture. i've been practising over 30 years. i have practical real-world

experience on a number of group projects in the city, most recently 468 turk. which consists of living studios providing independent living accommodations. in addition, the remaining 84 units are targeted to the needs of missing middle housing. this is an unmet demand that the city has stated it is serious about addressing. for the mini studios, they are to rent for one-third less than new developments. the proposed legislation would make this project illegal and unfeasible. if this was subject to the proposed legislation, it slash the capacity from 101 down to 61 units and one would have to provide five times as much shared category of space and

thus the same building volume and cost. this would reduce the number of inclusionary units. accordingly, everyone would be forced to use the shared kitchen and this of course would make the units less desirable because it would deprive residents to live as privately as possible. furthermore, no financial analysis has been put forward by the city to determine whether the proposed legislation is even feasible, no analysis, none, zero. it is concerning to say the least. there was a star city development as an exemplar -- >> clerk: sorry, i have to cut you off, but we are at two minutes for public comment. let's take the next speaker,

please. >> yes, this is david elliot lewis with the central city s.r.o. collaborative. of the last 14 years, 13 of them in s.r.o. hotel. i know what it's like. i've lived 16 years in the tenderloin. this legislation is very well thought out, both the new definition of group housing and the use districts for chinatown and tenderloin are really well thought out. i would like it passed on to the full board of supervisors. this is well-done legislation. it's needed. there has been abuse of the loopholes. we need more family housing units.

if we're going to get group housing, let it be in the specifications with half devoted to common use and kitchens on every floor. this is well-thought-out legislation. the planning office did a great job. thank you, let's pass this. >> clerk: thank you so much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors, i'm speaking on item 2, not 3. [indiscernible] we're just starting to hear and see some of the unintended consequences the legislation would have on this. there are a myriad of approaches to affordable and supportive housing that non-profits are taking. the salvation army will soon be

rolling out the way out initiative. we are very concerned that this legislation will undermine this effort, in particular the elimination of cooking facilities and [indiscernible] requirement. i appreciate that the supervisors last week did make some modifications to start making this legislation work more consistently with [indiscernible] affordable housing development, but it's definitely not enough to cover all the affordable housing legislation out there. today we're simply asking for a continuance to make sure this does not undermine things already underway in the city. >> clerk: thank you so much for your comments. we'll take the next speaker, please. we have nine in queue.

caller, you're on the line. >> good afternoon. i'm an organizer of an s.r.o. in the tenderloin area. it is my believe that the process behind 2 and 3 are right on point. we're talking about the densely populated areas within the tenderloin and chinatown. both share the same concerns. we're not opposed to whatever the developers want to build, but just not here. can't we spread it out within the city in other areas? i mean, why is the goal to put it right here? i think we can do that.

it's a good plan, it's well-thought-out, and i'm definitely in support of it. i live in a building that i'm sure many are supported by that. we all look forward to getting into affordable housing with space. we're crammed up and then covid doesn't make it any better. i implore you to pass items 2 and 3 as presented. thank you for your time. we have 27 listeners with 11 in the queue. >> i am a planner at the development center. we have full support for the definition of group housing in 2 and 3.

i was part of the group that expressed concern about the definition of group housing. we thank you for taking the initiative to consult around the proposed changes in the legislation. we believe there is a role for group housing projects and they should be the best possible. we also [indiscernible] -- with the highest concentration of low-income families and children, many of who reside in overcrowded conditions in chinatown. community stakeholders asked for this legislation that prioritize ss incentivizing family housing. we thank supervisor peskin's office and staff for listening to the community and crafting legislation that we hope will address housing needs in

marginalized communities. thank you. >> clerk: thank you so much. we do have an in-person commenter. we're going to toggle to the in-person commenter and return to the remote callers. >> thank you. thank you, supervisors. yay, this is my first time in person and i'm happy to be back in person. i am co-chair of the people's congress and tenderloin organizer in the neighborhood. i'm here today in support of the legislation and the changes proposed by the supervisor. the community has made it clear what we want and need in the neighborhood, a low-income, high-density neighborhood, we need more housing for our families. we don't need more group

housing. we had a flurry of group housing projects to build in the neighborhood, and it would seek to change the make-up and the demographic of our neighborhood by doing so. we're desperately in need of family housing in our community. great places for group housing, i think there's plenty of opportunities to build around the city and other neighborhoods should take their fair share and build in their density a little bit. we've been doing it for decades now. some neighborhoods have yet to build any. i would ask that you give your community this break. so we fully support it and i thank you so much for hearing me today. yay, in-person, woo hoo. >> clerk: thank you so much. let's return to our queue from the telephone line. we have 29 listeners with seven in the queue.

>> i'm an architect and teacher and chair of the advocacy committee and a 24-year resident of san francisco. i support the s.u.d. but [indiscernible] think the change to the definitions are being rushed and here to speak to ask it time being continued until a working group could be formed. i think the research was well done, but the fact that this was used by the commission to increase the common area per unit without any cost analysis to support it makes it clear that the true intent is to put a moratorium on group housing in san francisco. i think the conversation around this including the research, the conversation with commissioners, and public comment has excluded the people this housing typology

will benefit [indiscernible] -- in my opinion, this is a missed opportunity because what we really need is not to use this research as an excuse to overregulate these kinds of housing solutions out of existence, but to make a case for developing new typologies and incentivizing alternatives to what the market is producing. i don't have have to tell you we are in a dire housing emergency and what we need is a high level of [indiscernible] -- that we encourage developers and citizens to develop a wide range of typologies and systems that can support all kinds of economic situations. so i ask that this item be continued so that a working group can be formed that includes all of the stakeholders, including people who can inform the economic viability of these typologies. i also think that grandfathering

should be introduced into the ordinance -- >> clerk: thank you so much for your comments. let's take the next speaker. again, if you would like to speak for items 2 and 3, you just need to press star 3. >> i am a four-generation san franciscan and i am calling in support of the legislation as it is written. i talked to all my neighbors and what we need is family housing, we don't need more high-density housing here for single residents. what we need is we need [indiscernible] places for

families. that's my comment. thank you. >> clerk: thank you so much. next speaker, please. >> i've been struggling with the definitions in the planning code of [indiscernible] -- for many years. this is a good change. thank you, supervisor peskin. let's get it through the board of supervisors and review the map better. but i ask you to not hold it up, to do another round of consultation with developers. people's lives are at stake. literally their housing happen under siege for the past te