>> clerk: if you could please rise if you're able for the pledge of allegiance. ["pledge of allegiance"] >> clerk: and vice president elias, if i could take roll. >> vice president elias: yes, please. [roll call] >> clerk: commissioner elias, you have a quorum.

also here is chief william scott from the san francisco police department. >> vice president elias: thank you so much. welcome to the june 15, 2022 police commission meeting. we have a pretty heavy agenda, but not really. go ahead and call the first item. >> clerk: line item 1, general public comment. at this time, the public is now welcome to address the commission for up to two minutes on items that do not appear on tonight's agenda but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the police commission. speakers shall address their remarks to the commission as a whole.

members of the public who would like to make public comment, please press star, three now. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> good evening, commissioners, chief scott, and executive director henderson. i'm deputy public defender brian cox, and i'm a member of the commission to end bias stops in san francisco. i called tonight to ask when the working groups will begin for d.g.o. 9.01. it's been about a year that director henderson asked us for

input. it's encouraging to see how far we've come, but it's also a reminder of how much is left to do. the racial disparities in stops and searches remain the same and won't change until we begin. >> clerk: thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> okay. hello. my name is david calderon, and i wanted to speak with miss rosenstein with the san francisco police accountability department.

i currently have two complaints, i guess, that have now been erroneously closed, and mr. baltazar has directed all of my communications to go to him. however, i've been reaching out to him, specifically, mr. baltazar since the end of april, and they are ignoring my communications, and this is regarding a financial crime and an investigation that's been handled by the san francisco police department. i wanted to know if there's any chance that i could have miss rosenstein assist me in escalating this matter. that's it. >> clerk: caller, if you can e-mail me your information, i can forward it onto the department of police accountability. >> okay. can i get your e-mail? >> clerk:

sfpolicecommission@sfgov.org. >> okay. thank you very much. >> clerk: vice president elias, that is the end of public comment. next item, please. >> clerk: item 2, consent calendar, sfpd sb 1421 and sb 16 monthly report, dpa sb 1421 and sb 16 monthly report. collaborative reform initiative update. >> vice president elias: i need

a motion and a second. >> so moved. >> second. >> vice president elias: roll call, please. [roll call] >> clerk: you have six yeses. >> vice president elias: great. next item, please. >> clerk: at this time, the public is now welcome to make public comment regarding line item 2, the consent calendar. if you would like to make public comment regarding line item 2, please press star, three now. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. and they disconnected. vice president elias, there is no more public comment. >> vice president elias: thank you. public comment is closed. next item, please. >> clerk: item 3, chief's report, discussion. weekly crime trends and public safety concerns. provide an overview of offenses, incidents, or events occurring in san francisco having an impact on public

safety. commission discussion on unplanned events and activities the chief describes will be limited to determining whether to calendar for a future meeting. >> chief scott: start with the violent crimes. we're at 20 homicides this year. our rapes are up 11% and human trafficking are down 13%. total violent crimes are up 4%, 2,291 compared to 2,248.

total department crime is up 7%, 21,616 compared to 2152 last year. in terms of auto burglaries, i want to talk about where we're up year-to-date, 12%. we have seen somewhat of a trend [indiscernible] that's everything in the burglaries and other categories. we're up 32%, so that continues to be an area that we need to

focus on in order to bring these crimes down. [indiscernible] that's something that we're going to work with our service providers to try to see if we can make a difference in making and try to get help, try to get people in

a better situation with housing and try to get them off the streets through our service providers and the department of homelessness and supportive housing. our shootings were down overall 7% from shooting victims, 82 compared to 88 last year, and our homicides with a firearm, we're actually in the negative year-to-date from where we were last year, 12 to 13 compared to last year. stations, the breakdown by stations, in terms of gun violence. bayview is up. central is even. northern is down by two, and richmond has not had any shootings. park has not had any shootings. ingleside is down by six at least from where they were this time this year. tenderloin is down by three, 13

year-to-date. mission continues to lead the city in homicides. followed by tenderloin. mission has 8, ingleside has eight, and bayview has two. firearms seizures, we are at 448, and of those, 217 are ghost guns -- i'm sorry. 91 are ghost guns. 271 is the total for last year.

[indiscernible] the victim was traveling in a vehicle with another person when the suspect who has yet to be identified fired into the vehicle. the victim was hit and was transported to the hospital by a private person and died at the hospital of his injuries. no arrest has been made in that case at the time, but we were investigating the -- we are investigating the lead we have, and homicide is following up on some of the leads we have in that case. couple of incidents of note, there was a shooting in the tenderloin on the 9 of june. no arrests were made, but the vehicle remained in the area for a few minutes, and we are following up on that vehicle.

suspect discharnled a firearm at a daughter and a stepson and injured the daughter. the incident appears to be from a family dispute and the suspect was charged with a willful discharge of a firearm. there's a shooting at bayshore at cesar chavez, 11 june, 2:24

a.m. the victim was sleeping when he awoke to a sharp pain in his ankle and realized he had been shot. a search of the exterior of the tent revealed that there may have been -- there were multiple holes in it, consistent with bullet holes, so that is also under investigation. the last shooting is a shooting that occurred at third and newcome street in the bayview. the victim was located in the street with a bullet in his chest. at the time of the call, a call said that there was a vehicle collision, and the vehicle was traveling on mackinnon and

third when it collided with another. the driver of the vehicle remained and was transported with nonlife threatening injuries. the driver was in custody at the hospital as an unfired bullet was found in the vehicle. a search determined that that vehicle was involved in a shooting and the driver was detained. we had a complete organized attempted retail theft. the officers confirmed the suspect had numerous pending

cases, and the suspect also had the condition of previous cases and was fitted with an ankle monitor as a condition of release. a couple of other arrests before i wrap up. really good arrests by patrol officers on a bank robbery that occurred on the 4500 block of geary. [indiscernible] and all of the stolen money as well as other

evidence, so really good response by the officer being in the places where they need to be, known in the community, and that led to a really good arrest on that case. and then, the last consider that i'd like to highlight on patrol was on the 10 june, a victim was walking with a friend towards a bus stop when six suspects knocked him to the ground, punched and kicked him numerous time, and stole his jewelry and electronic equipment. two of the suspects were located, and a positive identification by the victim led to those suspects being arrested. it was discovered that one of the suspects was involved in a similar incident four days

before, so two suspects were arrested and booked for this robbery. last thing, major event was golden state warriors are one win away from clinching our fourth nba title in recent years, and we are happy with that. we will be heavily deployed in that. hopefully they will win, but we will be heavily deployed in various areas of the city. if they do win, we are asking the fans to celebrate responsibly, and for those of you who are celtics fans, accept your defeat responsibly. we will be deployed around the chase center. this weekend, we'll be deployed for all of the juneteenth

events, and we will be heavily deployed. if it goes to a game seven, we will be heavily deployed at chase for that. so that concludes my report. thank you. >> vice president elias: thank you, chief. just having difficulties pushing the right button there. thank you for the report. i'm going to turn it over to any commissioners. commissioner yee? >> commissioner yee: thank you there, madam vice president cindy elias. chief, i want to first thank you and your staff, i guess, for the -- i guess for the crowd that we had over at chase center during the warriors

play. it can always be challenging when you have a crowd out there. also want to thank police and command staff for major arrests. i have one question about land's end. a millbrae counselor was assaulted with a seven-inch stone on his head. i wonder if there was any update. i guess that's the federal side of the fence. is there anything on our side? >> chief scott: thank you, commissioner, for that question. we are assisting the park police with that investigation. it is their investigation, and we are assisting. no updates as far as arrests,

but we are following up and will provide any information as soon as possible. >> commissioner yee: thank you, chief, and go warriors. >> chief scott: go warriors. >> vice president elias: thank you, commissioner yee. sergeant, can we go to public comment? i don't see any comments in the chat. >> clerk: at this time, we will open public comment for the chief's report. if you would like to make public comment, press star, three now. good evening, caller. you have two minutes -- and they disconnected. vice president elias, there is no public comment. >> vice president elias: next item, please. >> clerk: d.p.a. director's report, discussion. report on recent d.p.a. activities, and announcements.

d.p.a.s report will be limited to a brief description of d.p.a. activities and announcements. commission discussion will be limited to determined whether to calendar any of the issues raised for a future commission meeting. >> thank you. the biggest things that has happened in our office this week is we have welcomed a cohort of summer stach to our our -- summer staff to our office. we have a broad swath of students from all over the state, students from college and high school, and they are eager and excited about the work we do and are going to be very, very helpful. i know they will provide an interesting update at the end of the summer, and that is our

update to the end of the week. as far as cases go, we are at 306 cases open to date, which is about 60 less than last year. we have closed almost 300, which is a little bit less than last year -- a lot a bit less. pending currently, we have 258 cases pending, we have sustained 33 cases so far this year. last year at this time, we had sustained 27. we mediated ten cases so far this year. last year, we had mediated 16 at this point, and we currently have 18 cases past the eight-month point. last year, we had 22, and seven are tolled.

the two stations that are tied with the most cases received this week are central and southern. the trends in terms of the types of allegations -- alleged allegations, not concluded, were 35% officers failed to take appropriate action, officers spoke inappropriately, and third, officers filed a complete or inaccurate report. we don't have anything for closed session. senior investigation chris [indiscernible] is with me on the call. i will follow up with the gentleman who commented during public comment. if you need to contact us and he is available, we can be reached by phone at 415-241-7711, and our website

is sfgov.org/dpa, and if anyone has any questions, i am happy to answer them. >> vice president elias: thank you, acting director rosenstein. we look forward to the end of the summer presentation with the interns. it's always a delight to have them in the work that they do, so i look forward to that. i don't see any of my commissioners in the queue, so i am going to turn it over to public comment. >> clerk: at this time, if the public would like to make public comment regarding line 4, the d.p.a. director's report, press star, three now. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> hello. can you hear me?

>> clerk: yes. >> okay. my name is mary bow. i'm the mother of a murdered child that was killed on november 17, 2007. i actually came there in person a couple months ago. good evening, chief scott and the commissioners. i know i have to make this quick because i was cutoff last time. my bottom line is really -- my son's case is in the cold case unit. it has been 15 years this year -- >> clerk: sorry. i believe you're calling in on item 6, which is the presentation for families of homicide victims. this is for the d.p.a. director's report. press star, three when you hear

the item. >> vice president elias: don't hang up. the item was placed on the agenda in part because of your inquiry last time, so please call back. >> clerk: good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> okay. hello. my name is david calderon, and i wanted to respond to miss rosenstein. is it okay if i can provide my d.p.a. case number for your reference? i'm going to go ahead and give it any way. >> hello? hello. i'm sorry. don't do that. it's confidential information. i already have it, and i was able to look it up on your name. i will be looking into it. thank you. >> okay. thank you very much. i appreciate it. >> clerk: vice president elias, that is the end of public comment. >> vice president elias: thank you, sergeant. next item, please.

>> clerk: line item 5, commission reports. commission reports will be limited to a brief description of activities and announcements. commission discussion will be limited to determining whether to calendar any of the issues raised for a future commission meeting. commission president's report, commissioners' reports, commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration at future commission meeting. >> vice president elias: i'm going to turn it over to my fellow commissioners. i don't have anything to report. i'm going to turn it over to commissioner yanez. >> commissioner yanez: thank you, commissioner elias. good evening, chief, acting director rosenstein and community at large. my -- i did want to say that i

worked with a large part of the community and young people. that was a large part of my career for the last 25 years. this lack of an understanding of how to file reports has come up, and lack of just access to that information. i'd like to know what we can do to continue to promote, you know, access to the system proposed to our reports and how to promote reports, whether it's at the school district level or community level for how people can continue to file reports. it's great that those numbers have been steadily decreasing as far as the number of reports that have been filed, but when we hear comments from the community about their lack of

understanding or there even is a place outside of the police department to file reports, we need to continue to work on that. so we can go on that just to strategize, but it is something that has been brought to my attention outside of commission meetings, also. and i would just also, based on a trend that i saw in the first quarter, chief, i wanted to ask you that i noticed there was an increase in arrests for young people age 17 and under in that first quarter report. it was something like a 15% increase, and i wanted to get a better sense of whether the department tracks information about whether these arrests are being made in the vicinity of schools, in the vicinity of

programs; what the reason for this increase in arrest for that younger population might be? and obviously, we will delve into the report at some point down the road, but i just wanted to know if you have any thoughts on that, chief? >> chief scott: supervisor -- i mean, i'm sorry. commissioner, i don't have the details on the trends, but i can follow up with you. i just want to get the right information so i can follow up with you on that. >> commissioner yanez: okay. that would be great. our conversation last week on the report around morale, there was a lot of conversation and there was a lot of information presented. one of the things that came up for me that i really think is something that i'd like to

understand a little better, one of the comments made by the union reps, i believe it was lieutenant williams, indicated that part of the concerns around morale had to do with an inconsistency in the disciplinary process, and it seemed to be an internal inconsistency in that process, and i'm wondering whether that process, you know, in the field, when you have performance evaluations, when indicators and incidents arising and they're brought up, performance evaluations are used to review this information before it escalates into an actual incident.

i want to hear from you what that looks like and how it is used before it escalates into actual disciplinary action. >> chief scott: so if you're referring to the early intervention system? is that what you're referring to? >> commissioner yanez: i mean performance evaluations in general. one of the questions that came up or one of the issues raised or impacts on morale is this lack of a systematic approach to discipline or at least a --

>> chief scott: it could be incident based, it could be performance based, but the performance improvement plan is

just that. the supervisor meets with the member and helps the member with a plan to improve performance. there's some flexibility in how long an employee can be put on a performance improvement plan. it depends on the situation.

we just want our members to understand how the system works, but that performance improvement system has been vetted by our city department of human resources, and it's something that we use when we see issues that need to be improved upon. >> commissioner yanez: right, and i know that was one of the questions i asked for about the last quarter report or the early warning system. but my question in addition to that is, is there also a system in place for performance evaluation systems in general? is there a yearly evaluation of a member, a sergeant, wherever they stand, and how often does that happen and do we

incorporate the early intervention system kind of warnings that we get to improve performance before it gets to performance improvement plan. >> chief scott: so yes, there are systems for performance evaluation. the early intervention system is not incorporated into that because that was implemented between the labor and the department. it's an alert or series of alerts that alerts us to the need for a performance evaluation. when i do recommendations with the assessment, this is one that we feel is still open, was

that we needed to improve our performance evaluation process, so that's something that will be in the -- what we hope to handle [indiscernible]. >> commissioner yanez: thank you, chief. i'm glad that we have work on this issue because it was something that obviously was brought up last week. anything that i can do to participate in those developing kind of instructing of a disciplinary process that is more equitable, that is perceived as systemic, i'm more

than available to do that, so please keep me posted on that. and i do just want to follow up on, i did want to know what the outcome of -- from those early indicator systems -- i believe there were 71 in the last quarterly report, but there were only two performance improvement plans. you said you would follow up to let me know what the outcome of the others were, and obviously, every case is different, but i want to know, what is taken into account.

>> vice president elias: thank you. it sounds like we can agendize this, too. so i'm going to move onto commissioner benedicto. >> commissioner benedicto: thank you. earlier this week, i had the opportunity to attend the memorial for officer john cox.

members of the community were present as well as officers that were in officer cox's academy class. there was a representative of supervisor rafael mandelman, and it was great to pay respect to officer cox. >> vice president elias: thank you. acting director rosenstein? >> thank you, vice president elias. just to address your question, commissioner yanez. know your rights is your campaign where we provide information to the youth in

general about their constitutional rights, about their rights when encountering police, but a big component of that is explaining what d.p.a. does and how they can be reached. there are pamphlets handed out during those workshops. in addition, we are working with the school district unified school district to schedule these workshops during summer school right now, and we always go to private schools in the area. lastly, we are providing our presentation and material to the department of health so

that when they go into the community, they can provide that information to the young people in san francisco, so i hope that answers any of your concerns, but we welcome any information you have you wanted to go to specific sites or address specific community centers. anything like that, you just let us know and we will go, but that's currently our plan. we've done independence high school, we've done i.w. wells, and we're looking forward to several other schools coming up, but i just wanted to address that. just biggie backing on what -- piggybacking on what chief scott had said, when d.p.a. is involved in the process, we factor in the discipline, we factor in the need for training. we often call in subject matter

experted from the police department, identified by the police department, to determine whether training is an issue, do determine how we can better serve the officer so that it is clear, so that there are no misconceptions, and it's clear to us whether it is a training, a policy problem, or a misconduct problem. we meet almost monthly with the academy and the training course options team, and we discuss training and issues that may come up and how we can best serve the officers. we're an active participant and

partner in talking about these things, so just want to point that out for you, as well. >> vice president elias: thank you. thank you so much, acting director rosenstein. commissioner yee? >> commissioner yee: it's a great thing i was muted there. thank you, vice president cindy elias. i just wanted to be on record to go into the san francisco police department call centers for the 911s coming in and also the direct dial-ins and how the calls come into the department and how they go out, just to get a feel, chief. so let me know when is the

perfect time to meet or go down there and meet up or take a look. thank you very much. >> vice president elias: thank you, commissioner yee. okay. sergeant, can we get to public comment? >> clerk: yes, and commissioner yee, i will set up your tour for the dispatch. for members of the public that are trying to watch the police commission meeting on sfgovtv, we have been bumped by the budget and appropriations committee, but we have posted on the police commission's website on the right-hand side for the meeting today. you will see a link to watch the live stream if you want to do that now. for members of the public who would like to make public comment regarding item 5, commission reports, please press star, three now. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> yeah. with regards to commissioner benedicto's comments about action regarding swift stops,

was there some polling done that showed that they wanted to see that or is that just the people he's talking to. with regard to d.p.a. case numbers, those are actually not confidential, those are public record. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, caller. and vice president elias, that is the end of public comment -- another caller just came in. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> hello. this is yolanda williams. last week, and also this week, we told you a little bit about the morale, and i did have some other points that i wanted to bring up, which is that first of all, we're just seeking an equitable fair process and a process that we deem to be fair and equitable. performance appraisals are great, however, they also need to have an end goal on it, and i think that there needs to be

more training on that so when an employee receives their performance appraisal, it's not taken as a negative or that we're just not checking boxes. another thing, when an officer reaches their 20 or 25 years, it would be a great time to alert the system or have the personnel alert the department so that perhaps the chief can sit down with the employee to find out how their career has been for them to help them start to transition to civilian life because you're not a civilian, you're a police officer, and i think we ought to offer that support to the

police officers before they get out of the system. i think if we can do some of these things, this would help boost the morale in the san francisco police department. thank you. >> clerk: vice president elias, that is the end of public comment. >> vice president elias: thank you. thank you. next item, please. >> clerk: presentation regarding sfpd protocols for families of homicide victims. discussion, per request of commissioner byrne. >> vice president elias: okay. who is presenting on this today? >> clerk: that would be lieutenant sanders. >> vice president elias: okay. great. >> i am acting deputy chief raj

aswani, and i just wanted to thank the acting president, chief, acting director rosenstein. [indiscernible] is part of the cold case staff. lieutenant sanders is in homicide. they'll talk about how they communicate and interact with victims' families of homicides, and lieutenant sanders, are you ready? >> thank you. >> vice president elias: welcome, lieutenant. >> thank you. good evening, madam vice president elias, chief scott, commissioners, and d.p.a. director. my name is calvin sanders. i'm a lieutenant of homicide here, san francisco police

department. i also have with me is sergeant leavy. he's the lead investigator on [indiscernible], and i have an investigation that i'd like to talk about. so what we're going to do is talk about the homicide detail's protocols for victims of homicides. here in the homicide unit, we have 16 sworn members. 15 of those are investigators, one police officer who's in charge of our video retrieval. we also have two retired officers -- or excuse me, investigators assigned to the cold case unit, along with

sergeant leavy. okay. kind of disappeared for a second. sorry. the homicide detail was here -- excuse me. let me go back a little bit. then we have one very important civilian staff member, she's our secretary here. here at homicide, we're responsible for investigating any and all homicides, any and all officer involved shootings for outside agencies, either inside agency deaths or outside, any deaths deemed suspicious by the medical examiner's office. as related to cold cases, we have a cold case unit where homicide investigators are

designated to work only cold cases what these investigators do is work directly with partners regarding cold case investigations. here, san francisco police department will take meetings with san francisco department of public health, san francisco -- excuse me, district attorney's office and families of deceased victims and victims of homicides and provide any case updates, service connections, and support services. [indiscernible] prior to engaging the victim's family, the officer at medical examiner's office must notify the next of kin. they'll arrange an in-person

meeting with the victim's family. initial contact by our investigators is usually by telephone, but in some cases, the next of kin is account kaed at the crime scene or possible sometimes at the hospital. the initial contact, more than likely a second visit is necessary because the family members may likely have more questions. they may be the first notification. investigator will meet with the person with -- the investigator will meet in person with the victim's family, and it's important for us to remember that -- for us as investigators to remember and know that the next of kin is a spouse, a parent, a sibling, an adult child, it's crucial that both parents and both parties know,

because in some cases, there may be cases with divorce issues or separation issues. we start out with a greeting, exchange of info, phone numbers, e-mails, contact information and office hours. we explain our role, which is to gather evidence and we represent the victim's voice, and we try to obtain information about the victim, whether it's good or bad, and we need them to open up with us. it's important that we know everything because we would like them to ask questions about that. we explain the process and investigative steps of locating and speaking with witnesses and how that can be challenging for us and it can take extensive

time. we have to review video, d.n.a. forensics evidence, and it's a lot of time that we have to wait for evidence to come back or results to come back, but a low-density of the times, our families think that we can just put something in the system and get an immediate reading, so we have to explain that to them. we also discuss how we can't share all the information effort we get something because there's certain things that we can release and certain things that we can't release.

we obtain information from family and friends, whether it's good stories, social media addresses or links that the victim may have, and we listen to the family concerns and expectations. these concerns or expectations may be family concerns, planning funerals for loved ones, relocating family. we answer all questions honestly and to the best of our ability, volunteering information. for example, some families want to know why, when, and how their loved ones were murdered

or who committed the murdered. sometimes we can't release that information until we find that suspect and book that suspect, because we just can't give out names and put other people in jeopardy. so we have to explain the reason why we do that. next slide, please. okay. so this slide discusses that the services that our department of public health and the san francisco district attorney does a great job in linking survivor victims to services and offering resources. the san francisco public health department is responsible or responds to homicides and critical shootings, which may include response to the scene or hospital. they work with support staff or for the hospital, engagement with support for the family,

doing meetings here at the hall or victims services, and many times, we've even been at the surviving victims' house. they have 24 hours a day seven days a week support services. they act as a liaison with the san francisco police department or the district attorney's office. they pretty much help us or assist us with -- and then, surviving victims' support. as far as the san francisco district attorney victims services office, they help the

surviving families fill out the complete applications for the california victims' compensation board that can support the following: crime scene cleanup, funeral and burial expenses, income loss, if it was a surviving member and they have children, or the wife is left behind and the sole provider was killed, then they assist with that. mental health services, relocation, sexual security, homa alarms, and then orientation to the criminal justice system and court proceedings. next slide, please.

the san francisco district attorney's victim services often advises of court dates and available resources. they'll also assist families with meetings. family members will also have the lead investigator's cell phone or e-mail and they're able to contact them any time with questions or, you know, if they get new information, they'll forward it to them or a case update. next slide, please. how often are families notified of case updates? we have a state law requiring

homicide investigators to call family members about unsolved homicide investigations on the anniversary of the homicide to provide any update for the family members and so the family members will also know who the outside investigator is. upon an investigator retiring or transferring from the homicide detail, the homicide investigator pretty much will basically call and let the family know hey, i'm being transferred, or they're supposed to, and here's your new investigator, here's his or her name, number, and/or

e-mail. thank you. i have nothing else, and if you guys have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them. >> vice president elias: thank you, lieutenant, for your presentation. i'm going to open it up to my other commissioners, but i had just a couple of questions for you. how many cases -- you indicated on slide two, there's 15 investigators, one officer. how many cases are assigned to each investigator? what is their caseload? >> so it depends. we have some investigators with a team of three, some investigators with a team of four, and it's a constant rotation of on-call, and they rotate on call every other week, so it depends on any cases that we have within a year. some people can be in charge of

maybe four cases a year, some can be in charge of maybe six

or seven. >> vice president elias: and then, the other thing that i had a question on is with respect to your last slide, slide nine, and you talk a little bit about how, for cold cases, how they reach out to families. what is the turnover rate because we get a lot of calls from families that they haven't heard from their investigator, they don't know who their investigator is, and they try to call the investigator several times, and their call goes unanswered, so can you speak to a little bit about how this works or provide some explanations to the public who are experiencing these difficulties? >> sure. so we currently have one full

time investigator, sergeant leavy, pretty much who is the lead investigator over there. he's the only sworn member that is full time. then, we also have two retired investigators, 960s, and pretty much, they work two days a week, and they pretty much assist sergeant leavy with investigating cases, and they also have their cases, as well. so there could be times where the investigators are either off, because like i said, they work two days a week, but sergeant leavy would be there, and that's about how that is. as far as the solution, we're always trying to get additional investigations, but as far right now, i know it's been approved, it's just a matter of getting overtime or

investigators into our unit, but we have been pretty much approved to get two more. we're just waiting to get those gentlemen here. >> vice president elias: and is there a person we should direct the public to when they get these unresponded phone calls or they don't know who is handling their case? >> yeah. they can call 415-553-1145. that's the homicide detail, and if you speak to the secretary, they can forward them to me, and they can talk to me, and i'll definitely have someone get ahold of them. >> vice president elias: great. sergeant, can you also post that on the website, too, for the public? >> yes. >> vice president elias: thank you. commissioner byrne? >> commissioner byrne: thank you. thank you. lieutenant, could you define

for the public what you define as a cold case? >> sure. a cold case is a case where there was an active investigation at one point in time previously, and there was an investigation, and it came to a halt, whether there was not enough evidence or we didn't have any information to proceed further. the case became inactive, and no one did anything on it for five or six years, and pretty much that's considered a cold case. >> commissioner byrne: so how soon can a case -- >> i'm sorry. how soon can a case -- >> commissioner byrne: so how soon after the homicide can a case become a cold case?

>> so -- >> do you want [indiscernible] leavy to go over the criteria? he has a microphone but no video. >> commissioner byrne: yes. >> this is sergeant leavy. sorry. if we could just go by the last question, please. >> commissioner byrne: how soon does a case become a cold case? >> so once a case is deactivated, let's say a case is deactivated by an investigator today, and then, that case lies dormant for five years, and typically, a case will be inactivated due to a lack of leads or lack of

suspect information.

you know, san francisco -- of the course of history has had a lot of homicides, many solved, many unsolved, so there are a lot of unsolved homicide cases which would call within the definition of what a cold case is. >> commissioner byrne: would that be more than 500? >> yes, likely. i have not ran those numbers, sir, but from over the course of history within san francisco and the san francisco police department, it would likely be over 500. >> commissioner byrne: and there's been recent

[indiscernible] about the golden state killer. there's a d.n.a. pool up there. is the san francisco police department doing anything with regards to that type of investigative technique to try to resolve some of those cold cases? >> yes, we certainly are. we have numerous cases that have been eligible for geneology, and one of the tools

that we use, especially within recent years, is gen geneologyd we do that through our crime lab. >> commissioner byrne: and how many times do you do that [indiscernible]. >> you know, i don't have that exact number, but i can get that information and get that information back to you. >> commissioner byrne: and the lady, miss bob, who rang earlier and came to one of our police department meetings several months ago, would it be difficult for sfpd to contact

the family at least twice a year? because as vice president elias points out, the idea that they need to come in front of us top voice their concern, it's not in the p.d.s best interests. would it be too much of a burden to maybe, twice a year, contact them, these people, so that there's a -- so that they -- again, so that they can feel like something at least is going on? thank you. >> so i will say we do escalate these cases, so we have 21 that

we have escalated based on leads available based on new technology that might allow us to retest evidence. and once we get those two additional investigators -- and it's not that far. they've already been approved by admin. they're probably just getting assigned by admin to start working -- they will be assigned some of these cases that have been escalated because there's information on them, and we could definitely -- i know that allen leavy does a really good job of reaching out with his team, especially victims that do reach out or do call the office, we do prioritize these cases. >> vice president elias: great. thank you. thank you for being here. commissioner yanez?

>> commissioner yanez: thank you, vice president elias. thank you. i just had one questions. the retired investigators that are a part of this team, is this by design that they are retired or is that because of the challenge that we're having with staffing right now? >> no, sir. it's pretty much something that we've always done in homicide. i don't know how far it goes back, but we've always had retired officers come back when we had the 960 unit. >> commissioner yanez: thank you. it makes sense. institutional knowledge is valuable, and i know that the chief has highlighted your work, oftentimes, and i commend you for the work that you're putting forward, and obviously, we field questions have

community on these cold cases. if we could develop a funnel system. obviously, when people experience a loss, communication is important to them. i hope you can take those things into consideration. thank you for your work and your presentation. >> if i can say, sergeant leavy did a great job and the retire members that are in our cold case unit, one retired as a captain and one retired as a sergeant, so we're looking forward to getting them on here to help sergeant leavy and his crew, and hopefully, we'll be able to start calling family members on a more constant

basis. thank you. >> vice president elias: thank you. i'm going to go ahead and turn it over to public comment. sergeant? >> clerk: at this time, the public is now welcome to make public comment regarding line item 6. if you would like to make public comment, press star, three now. good evening, miss brown. you have two minutes. >> hi, can you hear me? >> clerk: yes. >> i would just -- my name is paulette brown, and my son, aubrey, was murdered august 14, 2006. august 14 is right around the corner, and going through this again, just hearing them talk about active cases, my case, it's been 16 years. is it a cold case or is it an active case? just listening to that, it's

bothering me. and then, i think that the investigators should also contact us quarterly, not once a year, even more than quarterly. we're suffering. there's mothers and fathers out here, and there's more than -- we just recently put the digital posters out there at all the ten district stations, and there's more than 100. there's 200, 300, 400, all the way back to the 1960s. these are all unsolved homicides, that they put at all the district stations with a digital display. to hear them say there's 100, there's more. if you go back years, there's so many, and what do we do about getting our childrens'

cases solved. there's mothers whose cases are still on here, and they got tired of waiting, so hopefully, they'll come here and voice what happened. like i said, it's right around the corner from my son's anniversary, august 14, and the case is still unsolved. what do we do? how do we change things and the -- the time is moving, passing in my mouth. my son don't even have a headstone because the money that they allocated for -- the victims services wasn't enough to buy my son a headstone. >> clerk: thank you, miss brown. members of the public who have information, you can call the tip line at 415-575-4444. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> hello. my name is george duran.

i'm here to support pauline brown and the healing circle, and i liked the presentation. however, i was thinking -- i talked to an f.b.i. agent who was talking about cold cases. i remember in 1996, the rate of homicides in san francisco was so ridiculously high. and when sanders and somebody -- henderson had to come back to solve those homicides, i think a collaboration with that would

help. i think inspectors and main staff should meet with families a little bit more to establish trust because a lot of the homicides in san francisco that i know from the position that i work in, everybody in the street knows, but nobody's willing to come forward because the relationship between law enforcement and the community is skewed. so i believe that there's ways, and maybe there should be some t.s.a.s with family members and law enforcement working together to get at the community to talk about getting forward with information. we see a rash of homicides, a shooting in san francisco

because a lot of people really need to be -- >> clerk: thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> okay. hello. my name is david calderon, and i would like to share my personal experience with going through the san francisco police homicide police protection process. my mother was murdered in 1992. her name was carmen lita holbrook. in 2019, i managed to have her case reopened and assigned, and it was assigned to retired officer james spillane. in my personal interaction with mr. spillane, he refused to complete the investigation because, to quote him, my mother was a junkie and not

worth looking into. i also filed a complaint with the san francisco police department regarding this, and that the original investigators were found guilty of manufactured and presented perjured testimony. with this information being known, the san francisco police department, mr. leavy, i've spoken with you personally, has refused to reopen and reassign my mother's case, and the san francisco police accountability department has also closed this case and refuses to speak to me. i thank you guys for hearing me and hearing my experience, but i think it's important that you

guys know what one has experienced, so thank you. >> clerk: thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> hello. can you hear me? >> clerk: yes. >> this is mary bow. my son was murdered november 17, 2007, so it's considered a cold case. thank you for asking the questions in defining because i'm getting a lot of misinformation. i was told a cold case was over ten years. tonight, i heard it's, like, five years. i also heard something that was a good suggestion, that the inspectors contact us, like, grieving mothers or family members at least twice a year, and i heard george and paulette say even quarterly would be good. you know, in 15 years, no one

has ever called me. i've had to reach out and call, and recently, i talked to -- first, i talked to chief scott, and then, i got referred to someone else, and they gave me to daniel dede, who was really nice and offered to call me any time, but what's frustrating is he's still in the queue. 21 active and ten open. 31 open and active. that's kind of ridiculous, and only two retired officers are working on that. my son's case is considered a cold case. it's in a queue, waiting to be looked at. i just want to ask the people on the commission, it may be emotional, if it was your child that was murdered -- my son was

20. i have an older child that's 40 and a younger son that was 20. would that be adequate if it was your child, for two retired officers to work two days a week? do what george said. bring the f.b.i. in. you have so many active cases in san francisco. they go back to the 40s and 50s. for my son, it's been hard for me -- >> clerk: thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. caller, you have two minutes. >> hello. hi. can you hear me?

>> clerk: yes. >> yes, my name is kenya hayes. i'm speaking on behalf of my mother and two brothers. my mother lost her two sons due to gun violence in san francisco. my two brothers are tony dougal and edwardo tay. i'd like to share my experience with san francisco homicide department. i noticed that i have been doing most of the phone calls, reaching out. my mom, i guess she doesn't really have it in here to call and talk, so i call and try to talk to the homicide investigators. i've left numerous phone calls. i've been working with scott warneke. it seems like it's very hard to

work with him and communicate with him. i don't know if my little brother, edwardo tay, is a cold case. i don't know if my older brother, tony mcdougall, is a cold case. i know you said you were going to reach out to the families, but my mother has never gotten a phone call from homicide. you know, it breaks my heart because my mom lost two sons to gun violence, and, you know, it's sad because she doesn't even have it in here to do the -- in her to do the footwork. my older brother has a reward out, but my younger brother doesn't. it's been five years, and i don't know why my younger brother doesn't have a reward out. i don't know what i have to do to get that, but i would like

my younger brother to also have a reward put out for him. thank you for listening to me, and i hope you can reach out to the families more to let them know that they do have a supportive system with homicide and what they can do when they lose a family member due to gun violence. >> clerk: thank you, caller. and vice president elias, that is the end of public comment. >> vice president elias: thank you, sergeant, and thank you to the callers for calling in and listening to the presentation. d.c. aswani, is there a way that we can follow up and in a couple of months, we can have you come in and give us an update with respect to contacting the callers calling in today and being more proactive in contacting these victims or making an effort to

contact them more than just the yearly anniversary. >> yes, i can give you an update. and referring just generically to some of the comments that i've heard, we do work with f.b.i. federal partners. we've made arrests on cold cases and homicide cases and do work with federal partners. we do leverage as many resources as we can. i definitely will reach out to the family members. i'll have somebody from homicide go through the callers and pull their case file. >> vice president elias: great. thank you. >> thank you. >> vice president elias: all right. thank you again for presenting. sergeant, next item. >> clerk: line item 7, public

comment on all matters pertaining to item 9 below, closed session, including public comment on item 8, vote whether to hold item 9 in closed session. if you'd like to make public comment, press star, three now. and vice president elias, there is no public comment. >> vice president elias: great. next item. >> clerk: item 8, vote on whether to hold item 9 in closed session, san francisco administrative code section 67.10, action. >> vice president elias: i'm going to make a motion. >> second. >> vice president elias: roll call. >> clerk: on the motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: you have six yeses. i will tak

>> clerk: item 10, vote to elect whether to disclose any or all discussion on item 9 held in closed session, san francisco administrative code section 67.12 a. >> vice president elias: i need a motion and a second. >> motion. >> second. >> vice president elias: okay. i need a roll call. [roll call]

>> clerk: you have six yeses. >> vice president elias: all right. can we get public comment? >> clerk: at this time, the public is welcome to make public comment regarding line item 10. for two minutes of public comment, press star, three now. and vice president elias, there is no public comment. >> vice president elias: good. item 11.

>> clerk: is adjournment. >> vice president elias: with that, there is no other meeting in june, and we will see you in july. .

>> my name is kathy mccall. i'm director of san francisco national cemetery here on the

presidio of san francisco. this was designated as the first national cemetery on the west coast in 1884.however its history dates back to the 1850s along with the us army presence on the presidio itself. we have 26,300 gravesites that we maintain and thereare 32,000 individuals buried in this cemetery . the veterans who are buried here span all the war period going back to what we call the indian war, spanish-american war, world war i to korea, vietnam and then as recent as operation iraqifreedom . we have 39 medal of honor recipients. more than 400 buffalo soldiers buried here who are the african-americansoldiers who served with the ninth and 10th calvary . there's so many veterans buried here, each withtheir own unique

history and contribution . one of those individuals is all equipment prior. that's not her real name, that's her stage name and she was an actor during the civil war and while she was working she was approached by sympathizers who offered her a sum of money to cost jefferson davis on stage she did this but she recorded it to a union marshall . she was fired for doing this which made her a sweetheart to the local confederates and made her a good spy for the union. she gave information to the union until late 1863 when she was found out in order to be hung by confederate general braxton bragg of the union troops the town . no longer any good she even wrote a book. she was given the honorary rank of major president lincoln and

her inscription reads union spy. >> memorial day is a day of respect and morning for our veterans who have given their all five presidential proclamation it became a national holiday to beobserved on the last monday of the month of may . originally memorial day was called decoration day during the civil war to recognize the veterans whogave their lives . memorial day and veterans day getconfused because it involves veterans .veterans day is on november 11 is a day to honor our veterans who are still alive while at the same time we pay respect to those who have passed but memorial day is a day to show our respect to what was said and honor ourveterans who have passed on . >> lieutenant john david miley was a graduate of the united states military academy atwest

point in 1887 . he was commissioned as a second lieutenant with the fifth artillery regiment with the outbreak of the spanish-american war in 1898 he was assigned an aide-de-camp to major general william shatner, khmer and commander of the expedition to cuba.he was highly trusted and when the general staff fell lieutenant miley was designed to coordinate the attack on san juan hill in his place and would ultimately be the one to give the order that led to the charge of lieutenant colonel theodore roosevelt and the roughriders . a few days later he served as one of the commissioners who negotiated the spanish surrender of santiago july 17. in 1904 miley in san francisco wasnamed in his honor.we know that today as san francisco va medical center .

>> as a young man i grew up in south san francisco right next door to the national cemetery so when i became a cub scout we used to go over there in the 50s and decorate the gravesthat were there. when i got out of the service i stepped right back into it . went out with the boy scouts and put up the flags every year and eventually ended up being a scout at golden gate cemetery for many years. one day a gentleman walked upto me with a uniform of colonel retired . he grabbed me, i wasin uniform and says i need your help . from that day on i worked with cardinal sullivan doing military funerals and formed a group called the volunteers of america who brought in other veterans to perform military service and the closing of all the bases we got military personnel to do all the funerals. to this day i've done over 7000 funeral services and with my group we supplement the

military, all branches. i'm honoring a fellow comrade was given his or her life in service to this country. and the way ilook at it , the last thing the family and friends will remember about that individual is the final service we give to them. so we have to do a perfect job. so that they go home with good memories. >> our nation flies the united states flag at half staff by presidentialproclamation as a symbol of mourning . also in va national cemetery flags are flown at half staff on the days we haveburials . is lowered to half staff before the first burial takes place and ray is back to full staff

after the last arial has been completed . on memorial day weekend we have hundreds of scouts veterans and volunteers who come out and placed individual gravesite flags on every grave throughout the cemetery transformation from when they begin to when they conclude and to have that coupled with our memorial day ceremony is very moving and suchappointment reminder of the cost of our freedom . it's a reminderto us not to take that for granted , to be truly grateful for the price is paid not only by those who given their lives but those will have served our country and still pay the price today in one way or another and it's so meaningful to be to work in the national cemetery and see the history around us and to know this is such an integral part of our nation's past and present.

>> >> you are watching san francisco rising. today's special guest is jeff tomlin. >> hi. you are watching san francisco rising. to show that is focused on restarting, rebuilding, and reimagining our city. our guest today is the director transportation of the sfmta and he's with us to talk about the agency's 23-24 budget with the

muni equity strategy and new projects across the city. welcome to the show. >> thank you it is good to be here. >> i see the sfmta's budget for 2023 and 2024 has been approved. how will it help provide a strong recovery during the next few years for our riders, operators and staff? >> it has been a challenging couple of years. covid wiped out the basic finances. our agency is funded primarily from transit fares, parking fees and a fixed set aside for a general fund and covid has meant we have lost more than half of our parking and transit for revenue. we are not expected to recover them until 2027. this budget takes a one-time federal release funding and spreads that out between now and 2025. and our task is to rebuild trust with the voters that sfmta can actually deliver on their goals

and that includes things like making muni faster, more frequent, and more reliable. includes making our streets safer and making everyone feel safe riding the bus. it means taking advantage of the amount of change we're going to experience in order to advance equity so that we invents -- invest the most amount of money in communities that need our services the most. it also means supporting san francisco in its larger economic recovery. basically two years between now and 2024 in order to build trust with the voters and figure out how are we going to find muni moving forward because it is in 2024 and 2025 when the one-time federal release fund went out. >> are you planning on starting up? >> as a result of covid, we have 1,000 vacancies in the organization. that is why muni service is not

fully recovered. this budget allows us to fully staff through 2024, which means we can restore muni service, invest in safety, and invest in other programs in order to make the transportation system work better for everyone. >> can you talk about the mooney service equity strategies? as you move out of the pandemic, how has that plan been updated? i have heard there are elevator upgrades in progress. >> we have been working a lot on equity during muni's recovery. we have been basing our work on the muni equity strategy. this is the plan we update every two years that looks at the changing demographics of san francisco and helps us direct our transit resources where people need it the most. that means people with low income, people of color, seniors, people with disability, children, all the folks who have the fewest choices. during covid, when we had to

strip back the transit system, 13 quarters of the workforce were in quarantine, we directed all of the agency's resources to the equity neighborhoods. places like the bayview, chinatown, the mission, the valley, and even through our recovery, we have continued to deliver the best muni service's so -- to the neighborhoods that need it the most. right now we are still operating more frequent service in core lines in equity neighborhoods than we did precovid. and the result of that is extraordinarily high ridership. we are finding, for example, by investing in the frequency and reliability on lines like the 22 fillmore, that we are getting 133% of precovid ridership, even when the overall system is only at about half of the ridership recovery. that is 133%. that is on weekends.

we are at about 96% of precovid ridership on our main equity lines on weekdays. we're also investing a whole variety of infrastructure projects aimed at making transit work better, particularly for people with disabilities. on the market street corridor, our elevators to the subway station date back to the 1970s and need significant renovation. right now we are busy working on renovating the elevators at the station. we have completed the elevator upgrade for the eastbound platform. we are now working on the westbound platform. that will modernize the elevators and make them a lot more reliable, and make sure that we can continue to prioritize people with the fewest mobility choices. >> that's great. changing topics slightly, i understand the improvement project is halfway completed. have shared spaces made the product -- project more complicated? >> yes. lots of things have made the

terminal project more complicated, including things like covid and supply chain issues. we learned a lot on the first phase of the terra vale project, which rebuilt the street from sunset boulevard to the zoo, including rebuilding all the infrastructure of the streets, the underground utilities, to modernize all that infrastructure and make it more resilient, and make sure that we do not have to rebuild the street, hopefully in any of our lifetimes. we also learned about the importance of collaborating, particularly with neighborhood businesses and residents. we want to make sure that we are constructing the city's infrastructure in a time that the city is suffering and we are not adding to suffering. we're doing things like partnering with the mayor's office of economic workforce development to support neighborhood businesses through programming during this time. we are also making sure that

businesses that create shared spaces in the parking lane, some of those need to be moved out of the way while the utility work is done underneath them. we are making sure that we will either move those platforms and outdoor eating areas back as they were, or help local merchants rebuild them so that we are not adding to the burden of local businesses and that we help everyone recover in this challenging time. >> quite right. finally, many of the sfmta vision zero quick build projects have been well received. can you talk about the evans street project? >> one of the things we did during covid was dramatically expand the rate of what we call quick build projects, which are fast-moving projects using simple and cheap materials in order to redesign streets and test out new ideas and see how they work, as well as get a lot of feedback from community before moving into a larger

capital project that converts all of that plastic stuff into concrete and trees and, you know, curb extensions. what we have been finding is that our quick build safety projects are able to cut severe injury and fatalities between 25 and 75%, depending upon the location on the techniques that we use. so we are targeting streets that have the highest rate of traffic crashes, particularly injury crashes and fatalities. we focused on evans, which is really important connector for all modes of transportation between the bayview and the central neighborhoods of san francisco. also a street with a terrible track record of severe crashes. on evans, what we are doing, again using paint and plastic posts for the time being, is taking the lanes that are out there right now, and converting

them to one lane in each direction plus turn pockets. what we found on streets like valencia or south bend this, or -- south van nass, is a street with one lane in each direction plus a term pocket can move just as much traffic as a street with two lanes in each direction. left turning vehicles mean the two lanes of traffic are never really available for through traffic. these road diets that we do have been tremendously effective for improving safety outcomes for all road users, without exacerbating traffic. they do make all cars slow down to the speed of the most prudent driver. this week we are getting started in partnership with the department of public works on work to restripe all of evans between third and cesar chavez, and as part of this work will be

collecting a lot of data, talking to industrial users in the industrial district and talking to folks in the bayview commercial district and in the mission about how it is working. we will make some adjustments along the way and if it is successful, then we will start another project that is more capital-intensive to make it permanent. if it is not successful, we will turn it back the way that it was, having spent very little money. >> thank you so much. i really appreciate you coming on the show. thank you for the time you have given us today. >> it has been great being here. thank you so much. >> that is it for this episode. we will be back shortly. you have been watching san francisco rising. thank you for watching. [♪♪♪.

>> good afternoon everyone. this meeting will come to orde . welcome to the monday, june 13 2022 regular meeting of the land use and transportation committee of the board of supervisors . i am supervisor melgar joined by dean preston and supervisor aaron peskin. the clerk is erica major and i like to acknowledge the folks at sfgov tv. thank you for staffing this meeting.

do you have any announcements? >> board of supervisors are now convening hybrid meetings that will allow public comment while providing access via telephone. the board recognizesthe equitable public access is essential and will be taking public comment as follows . comments will betaken on each item on this agenda . those attending in person will beallowed to speak first and we will be moving to our remote call in line . for those watching either channel 26, 88 or 99 at sfgov tv, the public call in number is streaming across the street. the number to call in is 415-655-0001.again, that number is 415-655-0001. then you enter the meeting id which is 2499 861 0736. then press pound and pound again. when connected youwill hear th meeting discussions but will be muted and in remote only . when your item of interest comes up , please join those joining us please lineup to the

right near the curtains and those on the lines should pressáthree. if you're on your telephone pleaseremember to turn down your television and all listening devices when speaking . as already indicated we will be taking public comments or those attending in person first and go to the telephone lines. alternatively you may submit public comment in writing to myself at erica.major@sfgov.or g. if you submit public comments via email it will be forwarded to the supervisors and be made part of the official file. written comments may be sent to our office at city hall. the address is one doctor carlton be transiting place, 940102. itemsacted upon are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda at june 28 unless otherwise stated .

>> thank you very much madame clerk. to add to the announcements, masking is still recommended though not required. please continue to be respectful to those around you and provide adequate spacing if you are seated orlining up to make public comment . please call item number one. >> item 1 is an ordinance amending the administrative code to develop finance and support additional housing opportunities for low income andmoderate income residents members wish to provide public comments on item 1 to call the number on the screen . that's 415-655-0001. the meeting id is 2499 861 0736. then press pound and pound again. if you not done so and would like to speak for itemnumber one you need to press our three and the system will indicate you have raised your hand and confirmation . >> thank you madame clerk. this item has been a while. i have been working with

anti-displacement advocates, early education folks. for in the cds i community to address some of the concerns that folkshave . and i am happy to report that everyone so far is good. we also took the language that supervisor peskin came up with for the legislation and mirrored is exactly into this legislation so it would be consistent and we would be using one set of definitions so that makes it more seamless in terms of the operational of this stuff. and i'm going to just, i provided you both with the amendments and i'm just goingto read a couple of things into the record if that's okay . the first one is the definition

of property ownerwhich now reads , means property owner means the legal owner of recor . the residents who have owned the residence or at least five years prior to the application for assistance under the program for the purposes of establishing eligibility under the program, a property owner who has inherited the residence including any inheritance in or through a trust from a blood adopted or step family relationship. specifically from the grandparents sibling child or grandchild or the spouse or registered domestic partner of such relations or the property owner's spouse or registered domestic partner . each ineligible predecessor may addan eligible duration to the property and restoration of ownership for the residence . there are a few other things under section 85.2. single family property without

regards to zoning classification . then section 85.3. it clarifies as long as a borrower is not in default and as long as the borrower continues to occupy the residence of the unit as their primary residence except in extenuating circumstances as determined by mohcd. section 85.3, the. line 122 except as described in subsection c2c below it now reads if the borrower enters into an agreement upon commencement of the loan, to receive referrals of household with rental subsidies from the san francisco housing authority and the department of homelessness and supported housing or any successive

agency to fill any and all vacancies of the new unit or the residence during the long-term repayment shall be deferred until the earlier 10 years after the first certificate of occupancy is issued for the new unit or 12 yearsafter the deed of trust for the loan is recorded on the residence or new unit . then add language in section 85.3 page 6 lines 13 through 18. the property owner enters into one or more agreements with the city and then simply add it after chapter 37 in waiving the property owner's ability to displace one or more tenants in the new unit in accordance with the ellis act california government section 7060 as it may be amended from time to time. and then we addressed the look back position as per supervisor preston concerns. now in page 6 line for it leads

within the 10 years prior to theproperty owners application for the loan and continuing until the commencement of the loan . and then we are removing the language section 85.3 page 7 line 19 number four. striking the paragraphs to provide loans to low and moderate income tenants and existing until co-ops because you think that would be addressed in adifferent program .and then lastly, page 8 line 14. and why cd may adopt rules and regulations not limited to rules and regulations designed to limit abuse and fraud. and then under section 85.4 page eight it will now say and why cd set shall support property owners with a anything units to tenants receiving

rental assistance from any and all state local and nonprofit administered by the subsidy program. that is my amendment. colleagues, thank you for your patience. we hear from the city attorney there they are substantive and since we have canceled the meeting of the 27th and will not have a meeting for the fourth of july , the monday after fourth of july we can sit for a little bit. but i'd be happy to answer any questions or comments from you before we go topublic comment . >> great. madame clerk let's go to public comment. >> thank you madame chair, if there are members who would like to speak you need to approach the podium. former supervisor obvious . >> good afternoon chair and supervisors. john avilos.

talking to our houses and to work on ownership and restructuring mortgages and loansit's something that's missing is having real innovation in our homeownership programs, our loanswith the city . back in 2012 , with the housing trust fund we put language in the trust fund that would modify the down payment systems loan program and other loan that we provide to households that could help them to do any energy efficiency work or to actually do a cursory dwelling unit but the program wasn't crafted well enough for it to be utilized as well as a candy and it behooves us to make as many tools as possible or different ways people would seek to actuallypurchase, rent or live in a home and this is one of them so i appreciate that . i think jan just the passage of

this legislation it would be important to discuss further with some of our mortgage assistance organizations like meta- and the san francisco home housing development corporation and homeownership sf that we look at how we can make even more innovative the programming. often it does not meet the total needs of households. it's important that we look at that. they have a lot of information available to them with their experience in counseling consumers about how they get into the loan program so that has a lot to do to help you to craft programs that are relevant andmeet their needs. again thank you so much for moving this forward and to be continued till next month and have a great fourth of july weekend . >> thank you.

arethere any members of the public would like to speak on item number one? we're going to move on to the remote call in line. we have four listeners with three in the queue, let's take the first caller >> good afternoon supervisors. that wasn't murder with young community developers . i'm calling in to discuss my strong support for supervisor melgar housing innovation program that will allow homeowners to access financing to construct units on the property. without this type of program only high income property owners would be able to leverage the upcoming residential legislation to construct a new unit. the rhs legislation must continue to be catered towards existing laws and prevent the destabilization ofour neighborhood. this program must be sufficiently funded along with supervisor mar's program to meet the diversity ofhomeowners . sufficiently funding this

program will help ensure implementation of the residential program meets its racial equity goals and ensure better equity . lowincome property owners and sensitive communities need these programs tobuild units as well as generational wealth . this program must also include strong controls that prevent the program from the abuse just a situation wherean owner can transfer of property . which we must ensure this program is only for modern income homeowners, thank you for your time .>> thank you for your comments, next speaker please . >> good afternoonsupervisors , this is anna from san francisco tenants union and the race and equity coalition. well, $10 million is a drop in the bucket it goes to develop finance and support additional housing opportunities for low and moderate income residents including loans andtechnical

assistance or moderate income property owners to construct av use and other new units on their property another thing i like about this is it would provide downtown , down payment assistance loans for the acquisition of units by low and moderate income tenants who are at risk of displacement from their rental units due to anticipated sale of their tendency income and building and the desire to purchase their rental units and also the acquisition of single-family homes and condos and units by low and moderate income tenants who are at risk of displacement due to the sale or conversion of the single-family homes. so yes, let's move this forward andhopefully we will get more money into the program , thank you. >> thank you for your comments, let's take the next caller please.

we have five listeners in the queue. >> good afternoon supervisors, corey smith on behalf of the housing action coalition. we've always taken a very much all of the above approach to trying to figure out solutions to our affordability and displacement crisis and want to express our support and appreciation to supervisor melgar as well as supervisor mar and mandelman for bringing innovation to the table. this is just the thing we should be pursuing, trying to get creative andfigure out scalable ways to house more people . as mentioned by the previous speaker the 9 million is not enough considering the scale of the problem. we continue to invest in subsidized affordable housing and figuring out ways for government to incentivize solutions that there's not enough money for usto subsidize our way out of this . so every idea like this that we could put over somebody's head

is a game changing event. so again, i want to express our support and appreciation or the supervisors for making this effort . >> thank you for your comments. let's take the last caller please. >> good afternoon supervisors. mom and on behalf of eb go for context. it's the public charging station with more than 800 stationsacross the country . really speaking to that. >> i'm so sorry.we are on itemnumber one . forthe housing . >> isn't this item number three? >> we will loop back to you when we get to the item you need to pressá3. >> okay. let's take the last caller.

we are on item number one. >> this is ms. temkin. i'm calling to express support for the idea of thismeasure . $10 million isn't a huge amount but it is helpful and it includes communities that are powered in san francisco and having units measured so i appreciate the efforts in this area and i'm looking forward to hearing more. >> thank you for your comments and it looks like that is the last caller in the queue. >> president:thank you madame clerk, public comment is now closed . i would like to make a motion that we move this forward with a positive recommendation. >> don't we have to continue? >> of course. >> i like to make a motion tha we amend this and continue it . to july 11, july 11 is the earliest.

>> on the motion to amend as read into the record by supervisor melgar. [roll call vote] and on the motion to continue itemnumber one of the minutes, supervisor peskin . [roll call vote] >> chair: thank you colleagues. madame clerk let's call item number two. >> item 2 is an ordinance amending the planning code to prevent housing and community development workforce to collect fines and penalties for violation of those pending court provisions governing affordable housing and amending the administrative codeto allow the office of community development to use proceeds in

the affordable housing enforcement fund for all planning enforcement activities and affirming appropriate findings . members who wish to provide public comment on item number two should call the number 415-655-0001. the meeting id is 2499 861-0736 then press pound and pound again. if you would like to speak for item number two you just need to pressáthree and the system prompts will indicate you have raised your hand . >> we have with us sheila mclachlan of mohcd. >> good afternoonsupervisors. but to provide a brief introduction and pass it over to my colleague to talk in more detail about what we're proposing . the goal of this piece of legislation is to streamline the enforcement process of violations and planning code revelations for affordable housing units to bring more clarity when planning. there is no policychange that will result from this

legislation. the proposed legislation will not change the rules of enforcement that applied to a developer or tenant . the proposal does address administration of enforcement and fixes inefficiencies in coronation between mohcd and planning.in particular it will ensure mohcd is able to directly bill for our time and materials and receive penaltie . this infusion of funds will support our capacity to lead enforcement work. the result will be clarity on who leads enforcement action and who will removedelay and process but they need to enforce violations which are primarily predominately when owners are subletting their affordable units . the proposed commitments are theresult of close partnership between planning and now to go into our specific details tomy colleague jackie . >> if i may and may be just to the chair. >> go ahead . >> i think enforcement is a good thing and having more enforcement i guess i just had three questions and i realize there's an ou. one is does mohcd have

additional staff oris it falling on your already stretched staff and 2, just way it's written , it looks like the zoning administrator has the ability to delegate this. i assume that just happens by virtue of the mou and nothing beyond that andnumber three which is not to you what to planning . it's if anybody and i can talk to them but why two of your commissioners dissented which i remember hearing but i don't remember where i heard this that they were followed that left-hand and right-hand wouldn't coordinate well and that as a result nobody would be doing everythingor something like that . those are if you want to address those. >> is it okay if we do the presentation first?>> i just wantedto throw this out .>>.

>> good afternoon madame chair and supervisors. my name is jackie so. i'm here in my capacity as the homeownership and below-market rate compliance manager and if we could have the powerpoint backup i just wanted to walk through a few slides that will walk us through some of the details here. this graphic shows us kind of in rough terms the major milestone during the development process all the way until occupancy. and as you can see during the initial stages, the planning department is the lead. the developer goes to the planning department for their plans and get their approval for things like that but then later as they near construction the developers then come to mohcd to do pricing and marketing all the way through occupancy so there's really two agencies are very much part of

implementing affordable housing requirements fromthe city . along the way, there are varioussources where restrictions come from. we have the planning code, planning commission conditions of approval, notice ofspecial restriction . our commissioner of housing procedures annual and in the case of homeowners who purchase an affordable unit , enter into a declaration of restriction on the loan they may receive at a promissory note. so it's also important to know that this process is really applicable to a broad umbrella of affordable housing which of course the majority of that is inclusionary housing units that come from section 415 it also includes affordable units that are created through the state density bonus program home sf. other planning code sections,

regulatory agreements, developmentagreements and also voluntary affordable units . so a broad umbrella of affordable units . next slide please . this visual effects kind of a summary of the affordable housing enforcement cases that we worked on over about a 13 year period so you can see this is not anything brand-new. we've been doing enforcement for some time. mohcd flagged 153 compliance cases where projects moved into marketing and occupancy stage development. you can see there's just really a small, small part which we wouldconsider preconstruction violations . the green segment about 44 of the 153 or around 30percent , these were cases that came up during a post-construction period where mohcd worked with

planning to resolve the issue so these may be cases that fall along the lines of short-term rental or the rental building owner didn't provide reporting to us. things like that. but as you can see the overwhelming majority of the pie, 70 percent were cases where homeowners were violating their restrictions.and these were cases that were not referred to planning. these were cases that mohcd worked with the attorneys to resolve and this is where we had technical expertise. the homeowner violates their declaration of restrictions . their deed of trust and these are not documents that the planning department would be able to kind of have that expertise and wheelhouse. so it was really in stepping back and looking at this

history of enforcement workthat planning and mohcd embarked on that we then crafted the legislation that is now before you . we also have next slide if you'reinterested . seems like you've all had a chance to take alook at the draft. and part of that , the meat of it is that details the types of cases that we've seen over time. and to answer some of your questions supervisor, here we do believe that compliance is really important. we don't have, we do have staf that work on it . we need more staff and that's part of the reason why we have been working hard with planning on this legislation and we are thrilled that we have their support. they also agree that mohcd

needs additional resources to do enforcement work. there's more that we can do and we'd like to do more but we are just doingwhat we can right now. so that hopefully answers one of your questions . you had questions about the mou, can your people's questions>> i think those around answer. i was asking about the way the ordinances written . it says the ca can call upon mohcd and i was assuming that the mou is that calling upon. it's not like in every case tori has got to sayyou can go ahead and enforce . >> i think we have a fairly good sense and because we have such a wonderful working relationship together, we know which agency would best lead which type of enforcement case so that is the intent of the

mou. it's to spell that out but to also have stability in instances where there is a new type of enforcement case or if there's a specific situation in a particular case that warrants the agent take a look at even though mohcd may typically take the lead so there's. >> ability. >> and going back to what you said through the chair about the staff which is you acknowledged you don't have enough assuming that we passed us which is quite likely , and you are in the enforcement business and you can recoup money, are there an specific enforcement positions envisioned in the budget where about to vote on next month ? >> not next month. we need to first collect some funds and see what those levels are before we can make staffing decisions.>> but you don't have any staff to collect the funds with. it feels a little bit like a

catch-22. i'm not on the budget committee . i'm happy to give you staff and that they will generate enough funds to pay for themselves. >> we do have existing staff that are working on some enforcement cases .for example we have some cases the city attorney's office in the queue. so our hope is by the time this legislation becomes effective we will have someproceeds to deposit . but we don't have immediate staffing plans at the moment . >> and if there are no further questions i'd like to introduce andre maloney who is our legislative affairs planner from the planning department who will present on what happened at the planning commission . >> thank you . >> good afternoon supervisors, department staff. the planning commission for thisitem at their regularly scheduled hearing . there were questions about the

mou. it is required as part of legislation. it is not required to be certified or complete before the legislation so it'sstill in the works at the time we went to the planning commission so supervisor to your question about the two commissioners , i believe it wascommissioner imperial and more who voted against the legislation . their questions revolved around the fact that would have liked to have seen the draft and understand the specifics better. we did come back to the planningcommission two weeks later, last thursday with the draft that we sent to the clerk and your offices last friday and gave the commission an informational presentation . but otherwise the commission did vote to approve the ordinance the 26th on the may 26hearing. so mister t rva is here and available to answer any additional questions you may have . >>. >> i do have a couple of

questions for mohcd. the first you've already answered which is there's no immediate plans for you staffing and billy being really smell your with the folks that do this. it's hard for me to believe they would have the bandwidth to do the things they already do i know some of this is already being done by you anyway. and it probably takes longer because you're going backand forth with planning trying to figure out is it you or visit us so this is a good thing. i appreciate that . but i'm worried that by formalizing it and having it be on mohcd that it will stress you're already stressed work staff.

so i'm wondering if you can just provide a little bit more context as to once this is signed, you know, what's the plan? >> and as i mentioned we do do enforcement work now. it's been part of our typical business process for some time. a lot of this is work that we find out issues of noncompliance particularly with homeowners. and they may be for example we monitor them on a regular basis and we keep in mind through thatprocess they may not be with the other unit as they are required to so we're able to , wehave staff redo that monitoring work and we have a position for that .we've now have gotten it down pretty well that once we find evidence that we work directly with the city

attorney's office and we go through the civil penalty route to bring the owners back into compliance. so we do have homeownership monitoring staff who help out withcompliance work . my role is also dedicated in part to do enforcement work. we have our rental compliance and monitoring analyst houston is doing enforcement work as well so you know, we do have staff thatwork on this . we would love to havemore staff . i believe we are very eager to put together a plan to increase our enforcement staff. i just haven't had time to talk to our other deputy directors about what that would specifically look like so i can't timing and all that but i'm sure we would love to have more staff by next fiscal year if that's possible. >> thank you and the other

question i had is that there are some things that are or at least clear that there should be planningenforcement. for example anything leading up to the certificate of occupancy being issued . and there's things that clearly it's mohcd.like the compliance factor folks by the individual units but there are some that are in between. so i'm thinking for example you know, in the bmr units there's obvious construction defects or they didn't put in the kitchen or the whole bunch of issues that you don't find outabout until . until the owner goes and looks at the unit and it's kind of an in between so i didn't quite see that address in the mou but is there something you're still trying to work out? >> i think that it does

contemplate situations where there may be violations, multiple violations . some would fall under planning review, some which fall into mohcd's purview. we have a wonderful working relationship and one another on a regular basis. so the lines of medication are open. something that you just described has happened before and we worked with planning to resolve it . so i think the mou does contemplate that we would have a means to discuss who would be the enforcement lead on a particular case and figure that out. so we did attempt to itemize all types of enforcement cases that we have seen through time. there will be cases that maybe unique or we haven't seen yet and we will have to get together to figure out who's

going to be the enforcement lead but something like construction defects, they won't be able to resolve that. we may see it and we will bring it back to planning sothat they could help the owner to update that violation . >> thank you so much okay. if there's no other questions or issues colleagues, let's take public comment. >> thank you medicare. anymembers of the public who would like to speak on this item . seeing none were going to move toour call in line. if you would liketo speak on this item you just need to press star 3. for those on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you have been on unit . itlooks like we have five listeners . >> with that public comment is now closed. colleaguescan i have a motion ? >> happy to move this with the

recommendation . >> on that motionsupervisor peskin .[roll call vote] >> that motion passes. madam,thank you all so much for the presentation . madam clerk let's go to number three. >> item 3 is an ordinance amending the planning code to create electric vehicle planning charging locations, allow conversion of automotive service stations to electric vehicle charging locations without traditional use authorization and principally permit conversion of other automotive uses to electric vehicle charging locations to provide zoning control tables to reflect these changes and require annual reporting by the planning department members who wish to provide public comment on this item should call the number 415-655-0001. the meeting id, 2499 861 0736.

then press pound and pound again. if you have notdone so already and would like to speak on this item you just need to press start 3 and you will hear the system indicates you have raisedyour hand inconfirmation . >> thank you very much madam clerk. we have a brief presentation from the department of the environment and also planning . so welcome . >> i will wait until the presentation is and in the meantimeafternoon committee members. chair, members of the public . i am deputy and transportation program manager at the department of the environment joined by the legislative manager from san francisco planning. together we will present the contextand details of this legislation. next slide please . according to the latest greenhouse gas emissions number transportation sector is responsible foralmost half , 47

percent of the city's emissions. the color portions indicate barriers areas exposed to harmful levels of pollution and outdoor air which can lead to often preventable health problems. the map on the left shows air pollution exposure zone in 2014 and the map on the right was updated in 2020. comparing 22 exposure is worsening particularly along major trafficthoroughfares . so to reduce traffic pollution and to reach our net zero emissions goal by 2040 must take muni and electrified vehicles on the roads. of course electric vehicles and our mental and health benefits than on the evidence of the electricity they charge. the rest of the city. >> is increasingly free of greenhouse gas emissions and in

fact green power sf, our primary provider as the goal of providing 100percent greenhouse gas electricity by 2025 . next slide. speaking of the future, ev is inevitable. the california air resources showed staff regulations requiring all new vehicles shall be zero emissions by 2035. their plan follows governor nuisance executive order in 20/20 that call for phasing out new cars with gas anddiesel engines within 15 years . next slide please. the transition from fossil fuel toelectricity is accelerating . currently however this transition is much easier for single-family residence because of home charging. in california residents in single-family homes are three times more likely topurchase electric vehicles . however 70 percent of ourcity's

residents live in multiunit dwellings . many don't have access to all or workplace charging. many parked their vehicles on streets. access to ev chargers must be available to all drivers including those in multiunit dwellings. also in the process of developing this legislation we receive feedback from the planning commission and stakeholders to also support charging for fleet ev. next slide. again for those without whole or workplace parking they will need public chargers. san francisco needs like times more public charging by 2030. currently wedon't have enough and in 2020 analysis call for 20,000 chargers by 2030 but today we have a little over 1000 . next slide please . ev users are divers so their charging solutions, home,

workplace, retail, curbside also be divers . the city has done a lot to increase theseoptions . the city has policies to advance charging in commercial and municipal garages the public utilities commission and green power have incentives and ev friendly rates for home and workplace charging but when it comes to dedicated a serving ev and flee charging locations, we need to do more. dedicated ev and free charging locations are like gas stations with ev. according to a 2020 study these charging locations are the best charging solutions for san francisco residents without visitors, commuters as wellas fleet vehicles that lead on the way charging . next slide please. >> can i ask one question? >> goahead . >> why are youthrowing in flee charging in the same sentence ? >> because we received feedback

from the stakeholder engagement and the planning commission and also in the 20/20 study it dealt into flee charging. >> i think that we all have the same question. >> i'm tripping hard on ev's. so yes. i'll wait.>> thank you supervisor . >> back to slide eight. so this legislation will advance, accelerate give a kid a ev charter locations. currently the planning code does not have a classification for dedicated ev charging locations. project applications require developers and planning to work out permitting pathways on a case-by-case basis and projects must conform to existing planning use categories that

are in perfect fit and those limitations more appropriate for fossil fuel facilities. this legislation into cut the red tapemaking the permitting process easier , faster and clearer. it does that by creating ev an flee charging as automotive uses . it allows conversion to automotive service stations and gas stations to ev charging locations without conditional useauthorization and principally permits conversion of other automotive uses by like parking garages to ev charging locations . without existing auto uses this legislation will update to make evcharging a bit more permissive under conditional use authorization. next slide please .so to recap, this legislation revises land-use zoning to move san francisco from transportation to and all electric future. it creates clear zoning pathways with existing automated use and reduces the

lanes in addition to workflow for the planning department while expandingopportunities to increase charging options in more neighborhoods. next slide please .again, this legislation facilitates conversion of existing auto uses like parking lot and automotiveservice stations to ev charging locations. although it does not require conversions , this legislation does create new possibilities . it modernizes our fossil fuel based infrastructure efficiently and takes pressure off of mrs. whileminimizing impact on pedestrian safety . after all by uses. this legislation makes it easier and faster to expand public charging which enables residents and visitors to realize the health and environmentalimpacts of ev's . now i'll pause and transition

to the presentation to my colleague to highlight the updates for the zoning table . >> thank you. welcome mister starr . >> next slide please. so the approach we use to determine where charging locations are permitted was to first prioritize our auto infrastructure. to that end this legislation permits the conversion in whole or in part of any existing auto use at all zoning districts to ev charging locations.here it allows ev charging as a right anywhere gas stations are currently permitted such as pd districts, eastern neighborhood mixed-use districts . ev charging would require conditional use authorization and allneighborhood commercial kind of town districts ,and c-3 districts .and these district gas stations currently require either conditional use authorization or are prohibited making ev charging a more permissive use. and finally the legislation prohibits ev charging locations

where there is not already automotive use in residential districts. this isconsistent with our current gas station controls. next slide please . the proposed ordinance also creates a used definition for fleet charging.flee charging can include anything from delivery service suites like fedex to autonomous vehicle fleets. given its industrial nature we anticipate flee charging to be amore intensive use . to that and flee charging is only permitted in our industrial districts pdr won the, 1d and ddr two. and because pdr 1b is intended to be a buffer between residential and industrial neighborhoods flee charging has required in the industrial zone. fleet charging within the required conditional use authorization in c 2 and c 3, and c-3, eastern neighborhood mixed-use district and rc districts.

and throughout the rest of the city flee chargingas a principal use would not be permitted . however this legislation allows for fleet charging to the accessory use in the fleet charging locations that would allowfleet services to reserve or designate one third of the charging fans at ev charging locations . next slide please. so in closing we know ev's are coming in san francisco needs more charging locations in order to increase adoption. we need five times for public charging than we have today.a charging is important for san franciscans or for san francisco since75 percent of our residents live in multi family units and in addition to private automobiles fleet vehicles must be electrified to meet our goals . to that end this legislation creates a clear path to make it easier to develop flee charging locations by principally permitting theconversion of

existing auto uses to ev charging locations in all districts creating clear permitting pathways for each zoning district . passage of this legislation will have accelerate the reduction of harmful health impacts from air pollution exposure and help us reach our 20/40 net mission zero goals. i'm happy to answer any questions you might have . >> i'll start by asking a similar question as i did in the last item . do you know why 2 of your members are dissenting in this matter? can you describe what their concerns were? >> supervisor, i'msorry. it was a while ago . >> not crucial but i think actually i remember. i think they had concerns over loss of jobs in pdr districts and the concern that there would be too much flee charging in our pdr districts.

one thing the commission did to address that was to recommend fleet charging the all out with conditional use authorization in every commercial district to spread out the curtain of that and the ordinance has been amended to reflect that. >> got it. i think apparently according to the show we all havesimilar concerns about flee charging an uptick shot at expressing them . can you characterize your commissions hearing what the position of general motors was as represented bycrews and their lobbyists ? >> i believe that ev or ev companies in general wanted to have more options to locate flee charging so they are particularly looking at our rc districts and rnc districts to open up their locations. primarily in sort of the historic garages that were built in 1920 to be the ones that they electedthe most .

>> while we have not called item for you were you aware of the city attorney's concern that the conditional use provisions in this item and the next item conflict? >> i am. the next item delete it entirely which if you take the changes out of this one and delete it entirely solve the issue. it was modified in this ordinance to allow the gas stations to convert our automobile service stations to ev charging without having to go through conditional use but if that provision is removed then it should be more dominant. i know that at some point a few months ago i think it was planning staff or maybe it was mayor's staff or maybe environment staff asked my office if we had any issues and one of the things that we brought up is i don't think the monumental issue is that the definition was of electric

vehicle charging location was limited to a singular charging port as compared to potentially for what we want which is multiple ports i don't think that ever came up. i don't think that ever got. weraised the issue and i don't think that was ever raised by your staff to the commission . any thoughts on why itwas so narrowly defined and why we're not setting our goals higher than mark . >> i think that if someone's not going to install an ev charging location and justput one in. it's a large investment into it and it would almost likely be , they're not going to just put in one so i don't think we thought of it as a particular concern.it also allows you know, you can convert half the parking lot to ev charging or you can convert half the gas station so it allows more flexibility . >> so it wouldn't hurt your

feelings if we change it to morethan one ? >> itwouldn't break my heart . >> and then what i think i guess i'm learning we're all concerned about. and i see this as somebody who has stars from i can't put point any fingers inside the city and county of san francisco. there's only angers can point towards sacramentoand the public utilities commission . that really did i think a disservice to this city and other cities and the public as it related to the newfangled thing of the time which was tmc's where they refused to make data transparent. where they refused to deal with issues of equity. where they refused to deal with issues of passenger safety and pedestrian safety.

and i have those exact same worries in the emerging field of automated vehicle technolog . and every, not only as it passed state puc of future behavior but there around the city very reasonable comments and requests as we are the guinea pig for ev's have not entirely but mostly been met with the same kind of laissez-faire regulatory response as it relates to everything equity, disability . city for pedestrians. you name it. and i fear that general motors, the company@ to kill our local tax and state legislature but failed by one vote you

expressed to me that this piece oflegislation which i think is too generous to them, they think is not generous enough . and i have some serious reservations about the notion that one third of this otherwise laudatory goal for the 70 percent that the department of the environment is working to salt for one third accessory used for fleet charging is to me in the ev world comes into compliance with our reasonable desire is a nonstarter so i'll quote back to my colleagues members of the public which is i would take although i do have a question for staff or the city attorney. i would take out any fleet charging accessory use from this legislation until crews

want to play ball with policymakers in this town and itdoesn't mean contributing $250,000 to proposition a . that means talking policy shop in a way that is talking about thesevery important things in a dense urban context . the one question i do have an eye by the way completely agree with the thrust of this legislation. i agree that we need additions in this changing landscape but one thing i have been led to believe is that i guess this may be a question for counsel but that counsel may not be ready to answer is in the current unregulated,undefined world that we are living in , that the av folks are being treated as utilities and can actually do fleet charging in certaininstances as of , can

somebody explain that last bit to me? >> we have the zoning administrator. >> why don't i turn it over to him. >> good afternoon supervisors. goodto see you, corey t zoning administrator . you hit the nail on the head in a bit in the sense that there's two parts to this legislation. partof it is we need definitions and the second part is once you define audi regulated ? on that first part over the last few years we did start to see applications and proposals come in and questions come in on both sides like the retail ev charging proposal and the non-retail fleet charging proposal for the retail version was fairly straightforward in the sense thatunder the correct code it would essentially meet the same definition as a gas station . basically a retail facility for fueling the vehicles.

the definition is specific to gas so it's easy enough for it could be an auto service station if you're providing a certain amount of repair. for the fleet that was much more difficult because we do have definitions for different types of parking but fleet charging is not parking. it's turnover it's charging and if you leave the actual use is not parking . it's the charging use but a private nonretail use and basically, the only definition that would land on even though it was not a good and is part of the impetus for the need for this legislation is you go to installation because it talks about serving orproviding utilities including electricity etc. . so it's admittedly not a great fit but it was kind of the closest thing we had in the code and it was one ofthe key reasons why we needed this work

to come forward and create new definitions that were addressing a new land use that we hadn't seen before . >> that's very helpful. that utility where you landed was the zoning administrator's interpretationuntil we came up with this type of definition . so my question and maybe i don't know if this is counsel or to the zoningadministrator which is if we were to come up with this electric vehicle charging location definition , fleet charging definition and we were to sayand fleet charging shall not be an accessory use to ev lcs , we still have the definition and you don't have to toss them under your interpretation under utility. >> that would negate that issue entirely by creating this new definition and all fleet charging would fall under this definition. >> and that we could do by conditional use and conditional useonly and get rid of the accessories . >> once you create the definition youcan choose to regulate it however the board sees fit.

>> . [please stand by]

test. >> it is apples and oranges. i am worried about that kind of change, you know, without any process. can you tell me a little bit what you guys were thinking about that? >> sure, and i can hand it back over to the legislative process. i agree 100%. there needs to be two definitions. they are different uses. there is no debate the fleet charges, private fleet charging may look similar on the ground to retail fleet charging. parking spaces with ev charges. as land use it has potential to operate more intentionally that is why the proposal is to allow differently than the retail version. i agree. that is what the attempt in the

legislation is to define separately and regulate differently. i will turn it offer to commissioner star to speak to the legislative intent on that. >> thank you for the question, supervisor melgar. this ordinance has evolved over time and changed. originally we put in accessory use because we were sequestering all of the fleet charges to one area of the city to help spread it out. however, at the planning commission they recommended to include neighborhood commercial districts with c.u. had we started at the beginning, perhaps with the c.u. we might have not had accessory use. it was intended to provide flexibility for the fleet charging throughout the city.

>> chair melgar: supervisor preston. >> thank you, chair melgar. i want to concur with the sentiments expressed by my colleagues. it is hard for me to see the situation on the fleets where we would not want be to have conditional use. i will take issue with the department of environment framing of the reduction of red tape. i think there are real issues that come along especially on the fleet front. i don't know that conditional use. i think it is unfair to that aspect of our planning code to frame that as being red tape. i think we are talking about what would for fleets we are looking at potentially exponen shall increase in vehicles accessing those sites. that trigger important issues including how it lines up with vision zero and preventing

fatalities and injuries on the streets. we can have that conversation around the appropriate way to address fleets, but i would certainly concur with all of the comments both colleagues have raised. >> thank you, supervisor preston. madam clerk. if there is no other comments. >> i will do mine after public comment. >> one other question, chair melgar. >> chair melgar: sure. >> in the presentation there was reference to folks in multi-unit buildings trouble finding chargers. someone with a single family home with no basement or garage it is an issue for those without a garage. i am curious. maybe it is for the department of environment. i know chair melgar represent

bely tweeted about this. in addition to these central locations as part of the plan to get to the five times where we are more de central approach. la is in front with light pole charging stations. not directly at issue. it relates to the strategy for scaling up here. are there current plans for that de centralized model as well? >> yes, there is. i have gone back to the traffic. we know the charging and the pieces to making the puzzle work. some like those in multiunits will use the ev charging locations. there are options for those shopping at retail center, gallery they can use while

shopping. having. >> they are moving to charges. all of pieces are coming together. >> chair melgar: madam clerk. public comment on this item. >> any members of the public for item 3, please approach the podium. no members. if you would like to speak press star 3 to be added the queue. on hold wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. we have 11 listeners with eight in the queue. first caller, please. >> good morning. i am with the all electric

autonomous vehicle company. thank you for improving the electric vehicle charging infrastructure. they will have a role by 2040. reliable charging infrastructure is key to reducing reliance on gas vehicles. it is a good first step for the city. we look forward to working with the city. thank you. >> caller: good afternoon. christopher peterson on the league of conversation. we urge you to support the electric vehicle charging ordinance.

many vehicle owners in san francisco do not have convenient access to chargers. to accelerate the transition we support efforts to make electric charging stations more convenient and accessible. it is a good step in that direction. we have automobile missions at appropriate locations for chargers. we should no longer allow or delay installation of chargers. it is taking the position how to sort out issues of fleet charging and autonomous vehicles. the league supports the ordinance with respect to the charging for individuals. thank you. >> next caller, please.

>> i am calling on behalf of tony secretary treasure of 665. we applaud the efforts to increase access to charging stations. we have concerns. we ask the board to remove amazon type uses. a case-by-case basis for public discussion. >> next speaker. 10 listening. five in queue. >> good afternoon. research director with san francisco electrical construction industry. we are glad to see this move forward. i don't want to too up more time. we are working closely within stalling the ev chargers.

thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am here on behalf of. [indiscernable] we urge the commission to adopt this ordinance. i mentioned that the ev market is tolerating the number of charges we did in different cases to measure. the lack of ev charges is a huge hurdle to address in the infrastructure. we cannot express the importance of ev charging to provide outside emissions reductions by commercial charging in particular. thank you. >> next speaker, please.

>> i am with. [indiscernable] san francisco. district nine constituent. i urge support to speed up administrative side of putting in ev chargers. as supervisor preston noted. those without garages or in multi-family buildings will only have fast chargers which are much more expensive. if we have large charging places like parking places that people can put cars overnight, they can get a much cheaper charge that would be closer to what people get at home. i think that is important. however, this measure should make it easier and faster to put in chargers. we need a whole lot more chargers as soon as we can get them if we are helping ev adoption.

however you deal with the fleet, just make it a clear pathway because all vehicles whether they are fleet, amazon, no matter who they are, we have to go to ev. no more gas. thank you. >> next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. district 10. we agree with the intent of the legislation environmental and climate goals of making ev charging more accessible. we are concerned about the impact on low income communities. this does not require c.u. for converting sites which results in loss of blue coallar jobs. -- collar jobs. we ask c.u. be required unless all jobs are retained. five year look back from eliminating jobs ahead of time

so they will qualify. we are concerned the legislation legislation. [indiscernable] it is automated. most at risk of conversion. we need auto shops in san francisco. it is counterproductive if they have to drive out of the city to get serviced at affordable price. fleet charging will be concentrated in district 9 and 10. they will very likely be replacing blue collar jobs. the jobs for spaces that are automated. communitied rely on those jobs. equity in terms of where the fleet charging stations are located. it talks about the housing areas. that is not the case. near schools. we should leverage existing lots

such as churches, schools and malls. that would be more equitable. we must ensure there is equity analysis of impact job loss and geography of charging stations. i urge you to reevaluate this. thank you. >> again if you would like to speak have not pressed star 3 do so now. otherwise we will take the last caller in the queue. >> david pilpel. i express no particular view on the land use implications of this, although it makes sense to have a definition than the va make the determination. i guess that is okay. my concern is about the move to electric vehicles for city

fleets and implications at city parking facilities in the city and elsewhere. the issues that the city continues to have with pg&e about electric infrastructure and inter-vening facilities. whether it is a parking lot at central shops or something up at moccasin or the airport or county jail at san bruno, all of these locations where there are city vehicles parked as the city fleet becomes more electric vehicles and more electric vehicle charging struckures will be needed which further compound the issues. it may be slightly off topic today. i suggest at future hearing on the central shops budget later

this week or just at future hearing that somebody ask about how the city's fleet moves to electric vehicles and infrastructure on the city side. thanks for listening. >> that completes the queue. >> chair melgar: public comment is closed. supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: i will take a shot. if not the city attorney does not like doing this without us having checked in first. let me see if i can take a shot at it. i assume fleet charging has to stay in the automotive use section 102 larger definition, is that correct? i am looking at page 6 line 19

that adds electrical vehicle charging location and adds fleet charging. i would take it out there if you would let me, but i think it needs to stay in there. there are two subcategory res nonretail and retail. it is on the nonretail side. doesn't show up on the retail side. larger automotive use definition, is that correct? >> that's correct. that is how it is organized. it needs to be listed there. >> supervisor peskin: that is what i thought. not related to where we are going with fleet, i would propose on page 7 line 2 that seas one or more to strike one or and instead say more than one electrical vehicle charging stations so that we define it as more than one. not this aaron but the other aaron. i would then suggest we strike

the accessory use sentence in that same definition of electrical vehicle charging station which we are all in agreement on on page 7 at line 13. strike that last sentence of that paragraph. then we would need to make a conforming change on page 11 at section 204-point to conform with the definition, right? i think you just get rid of 204.6. i see the city attorney nodding. if we are all in agreement about our av concerns, i think on page

14 line 15 we would change the three p's in the charge to c's. page 14 line 15. bottom of the automotive use category chart. those three 3's. they would become three c's. i may be getting in trouble. mr. star are you freaking out? >> the zoning administrator has a friendly amendment. we list when something is not accessory use. medical cannabis and the section is not with me right now that lists things not accessories. if you want fleet charging not to be accessory use list it there. >> supervisor preston: thank you for that. we would want to incorporate

that, madam deputy city attorney. i think that addresses everything. i did have one be question. relative to existing garages. what is the regiment for changing existing garages into fleet charging? >> it would be whatever the land use controls are for that zoning district. you would use existing garage to fleet charging. >> supervisor preston: say that again. >> c.u. to convert existing garage to fleet charging. >> supervisor preston: that is the desire until we work things out with crews. >> it is underlying zoning district doesn't matter if it is a garage or what have you.

>> supervisor preston: when this is a principal use, how does that -- sorry if this sounds ignorant, what does that mean relative to other uses. if vehicle charging is permitted use and there are other uses, how do they play together? >> more than one use on one site? >> yes, you could have electrical vehicle charging station at ground floor. housing development above it or whatever. >> you just need building permits to memorialize each use. you can have multiple uses permitted on the same site to be documented. you have to get a permit for it. >> was that too much too soon? >> it is a lot. deputy city attorney appear son. i anticipated some of your

amendments. i chatted with the drafting attorney. i didn't anticipate all of them. some i haven't run by him. in an area regulated by state law with complicated tables i am anxious about doing this on the fly. if you want to come back i will see if we can figure that out. >> supervisor preston: we will make item 4 as long as possible. >> colleagues should we continue this to -- >> supervisor preston: we might be able to do it. >> chair melgar: after 4:00. >> i will see what i can workout. >> chair melgar: can we -- what do we do continue to until after item 4? suspend that.

let's call item 4. >> ordinance amending the planning code to increase density on lots with auto oriented uses where housing is permitted but which do not currently have any residential use or legacy business and to remove the conditional use requirement to change the use of an automobile service station or automotive use to another use and amend zoning control tables to reflect the change. call 415-655-0001. if you have not done so and would like to speak press star 3. the system will indicate you have raised your hand. madam chair. >> chair melgar: this is a piece of legislation introduced by the mayor's office. i don't see anyone here from the

mayor's office. i wonder if mr. star will be making the presentation. >> welcome. mr. paulina. are you there? i can't hear you. >> he may have stepped away from the meeting. >> chair melgar: mr. star, who is presenting on this?

>> i am not on the item. we have presented the planning commission recommendation. we don't normally do a second one. >> chair melgar: there is no one to present on this item. we will go into any discussion. here is monica. >> thank you, chair melgar. monaco, planning department staff. as mr. star shared we provided our planning commission report. i am available for questions. i wanted to make sure you are aware. >> chair melgar: clarify for me. this legislation has been changed since the planning commission heard it, right? >> yes, that's correct. a number of those revisions are presented to you during the

march 7 or 8 committee hearing. those included changing the provision regarding the on site from 10 to four years. incorporated allowing the last vehicle used to be considered as the authorized use on the property. i can pull that up more specifically for you. i apologize. i thought that was incorporated and presented at the last hearing. >> chair melgar: i understand my colleagues have proposed amendments. i will go to supervisor -- >> supervisor preston: if i understand it correctly, the

primary author, the mayor, was amenable to exception for. this is the way i understand through the grapevine for rmrc and designated article 10 historic districts. i saw those amendments. i don't want to speak for anybody not here. i am comfortable with those amendments. >> chair melgar: supervisor preston. >> supervisor preston: i am fine with the amendments supervisor peskin described. i continue to have an issue i raised at the last hearing. i have raised in discussing this last week with the mayor's office and the representative of the mayor and planning. the issue and really this legislation has two big parts. there is the making it easier to

change car use to other uses which i am fully supportive of that effort. that is not where i take issue. where i take issue on the second part removal of density restrictions which in some cases can dramatically increase the number of units the developer can build on the site. i will say in my district we have this exact issue. we have a project from 16 to over 60 units overnight. by the upzoning. another one from about 50 to over 150. 52 to 170, if i am not mistaken. i don't have a problem with that. what i have a problem with is doing that and not exploring whether the city should demand

more of that developer in terms of affordability or other community benefits on the site. what i would like to hear from the mayor's office or planning or both is the same thing i asked last week. why are we not doing that here? historically in the city when we have engaged in up zoning. we have looked to increase affordability rates as part of that process. in my district we had one incident where we did not do that. we made exactly this change dramatically increased number of units on the sites. after a few years came back and corrected the mistake of not required higher affordability rate. there was a feasibility study

done by planning to determine what that rate should be. i assume i asked privately i didn't get an answer. has there been any feasibility analysis to determine the feasibility of additional affordability as part of the removeval of density restrictions? if so, what did it say? if not why hasn't it been done? >> i don't know who is available to answer that. the planning department representatives are not here. >> chair melgar: i believe ms. flores is on. >> supervisor preston: on page 9 there is a provision that seems to conflicted with the

legislation that we just passed that supervisor mandelman brought that we heard a number of times. i commented the chair for her process. d subparagraph 1. that appears to me that it would obviate the rents control provisions of supervisor mandelman's legislation. it would no longer require a waiver which is what allows for the agreements which allows for rent control. if we include that sentence we just undid supervisor mandelman's rent control in multiplex. >> chair melgar: can you answer these questions ms. flores? >> yes. thank you. with respect to the first question regarding how many

feasibility studies. plans is supportive of additional affordable housing in general. i have yet to see any specific work on these efforts for this ordinance. i would have to look further to get back to you on that information. regarding the additional question, supervisor peskin, subsection d1. it was less in place just because we were not aware of the timing of the recent legislation in front of you the last couple weeks. we want to retain that specific language in case this specific ordinance made its way through the legislative process ahead of

supervisor mandelman's legislation. we do recognize the overlap there and we also noted internally that supervisor mandelman's legislation was more expansive in reach as this ordinance relates to the other uses the best approach is to keep it in for now to make sure that if this was the only lemming laying moving forward we would be able to capture those specifics. >> supervisor preston: it sounds like that provision is no longer necessary given supervisor mandelman's legislation? >> that's correct. >> supervisor preston: as i read it i might have the same question relative to subsection 2 whether that would obviate the

ability to impose rent control for waivers. as i -- i am sorry for doing this on the fly. i did re-read over the weekends. next section is sub e. i have questions as to how it would and then corey left. how that would interpret words not related to permit residential density shall continue to apply. what is related to permit residential density? that is a pretty broad. that, too, gives me rent control concerns. >> where property owner may seek

conditional use authorization for additional residential density. that would be an example of rh-1 lot, very large rh-1 lot so the property owner would be able to request conditional use authorization for an additional unit for every 3,000 square feet on the property. up to three units total on the property. this specific subsection e would remove that requirement for the rh-1 example. if there is -- i am trying to think of nonresidential density environment. >> how about c.u. for a planned unit development that has increased residential density that would be an exception and

there goes your ability to get more affordability or impose rent control? that would be related to residential density as many puds are. >> yes. >> that i am thinking of bringing that to our attention. i will look at that specific language as we continue with the hearing as well. thank you. >> i am happy to do that if you have things to address first. i would like to do that before public comment. the response raises more

questions for me. thank you. first off on the general comment that planning generally supports more affordability. i would like to know if planning recommended that affordability rate increase as part of this legislation to the mayor's office or that a feasibility study be done. >> affordability rates are not specifically recommended as part of this ordinance specifically. >> that is what i am trying to find out. with their recommendation the rates be increased in exchange for the increased density under this ordinance?

>> i have stated they were not included as part of discussion for this specific ordinance. >> why not? >> just parallel simultaneous review of separate legislation and supervisor mandelman's legislation and those related and similar efforts regarding increased affordability for ordinances are very difficult to be able to move forward to the general public and moving forward through the legislative process. this was very, very focused on small sub sets of lots. we were really looking to be focused on the auto uses and

were hoping to move forward on the basic small subset of parcels. >> how many parcels or lots across the city does this apply to? >> we had a conservative estimate. i am pulling up the map and stuff to get our rough estimate for you. that would be a total of 131rh parcels and 627 nonresidential parcels that would meet the criteria. however, that are parcels that

are unlikely to be developed through this program. we filtered out parcels are a high floor area airio of 2.4 or higher with no density bonus through this program. filtering out more left 120rh parcels and 500 nonresidential parcels that would be eligible and be a good potential or good match for this density bonus. >> that is big. i wish i could say i am surprised. it is a little hard to wrap our head around why we would not discuss higher affordability requirements on the potential of zoning and elimination of

density controls over 758 parcels city-wide at which estimate is that 620 of them would actually be eligible and potentially using this. analysis of all properties a hell of a lot of development and affordable housing we are leaving on the table. do we not have anyone from the mayor's office here to address this legislation? >> to signed into teams. >> i would love to hear from mr palino or someone from the mayor's office this issue around increasing affordability as part of this.

>> the question? >> if question we heard from planning that increasing affordability rates as part of this density de control up zoning was never discussed. can i confirm that? if it hasn't been discussed, why not? >> i apologize, supervisor. i am not familiar with the conversations. i can't attest if that came up. i can check with my colleagues and get back to you. i can touch base to get clarity on that for you. >> if you could get clarity whether a feasibility study was requested by the mayor's office around increasing affordability on the site. if not, why not? get someone to answer the questions. i got to say this is not a

mystery these issues would come up. we discussed with planning. we knew there would be discussions here today. i don't know why we don't have one ready and able to answer these questions from the mayor's office. if we want to put this one over, too. i don't know how we proceed on an ordinance designed to eliminate density controls on 620 sites city-wide. 758 sites city-wide with no serious discussion around affordability. it is really mind blowing. we can agree with the desperate need for affordable housing and what we established is neither the planning or mayor's office of housing has any plans to meet

affordable housing goals. that is admitted in the hearings. one would think abissent the plan to create affordable housing the one thing that is mayor's office is working on for profit market rate development we use maximize affordable housing on site when we up zone as we have done in the past. when we didn't do it on the ct we had head of planning admitting mistake. my predecessor corrected that mistake. i don't want to be cynical about these things. i get that the press release goes out. nice language. are we serious about regulating and housing affordability or compete everything for media? i originally thought it might

make sense to divide up this legislation, figure out how to move partings of it forward. we need answers on this issue of affordability rate if this legislation is more than just a media opportunity. a chance to move housing policy forward. >> chair melgar: thank you, supervisor preston. i think that there is a fundamental question of policy that has not been answered. i think that since we took care around these issues of affordability and also getting to a point where we have consensus on multiple issues in this committee, i would be inclined to continue this until we have both the answers to your pertinent questions and folks from the mayor's office who

worked on this to talk about it. if there is no further questions or comments maybe we can go to public comment and come back and take action. >> supervisor preston: i am happy to move what we discussed. >> chair melgar: until everything is ready. public comment. >> item four? there are no members in the chamber. we will move to remote. if you are on hold continue to hold until you are unmuted. if you have not pressed star 3 already, do so now. it will show that you would like to speak on item 4. we have five listeners. four in the queue. first caller, please.

>> caller: good afternoon. christopher speaking on behalf of the san francisco league of conservation voters. we support the san francisco affordable housing. the city's walkability and public transit system. san francisco is appropriate location for multifamily housing. the types of multifamily housing, nature and cost of housing. converting the automobile uses to multifamily housing. address both crisis. it is important the ordinance makes a real world difference. as the community considers potential amendments, it is important that the amendments

are under potential development. i am disappointed that the mayor's office hasn't been present for this hearing to address the questions that we are raising. hopefully they will be present at a future meeting. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. >> turn down your television in the background. >> caller: thank you. hello. i am donna her wit. i am a resident living in the

outer hills. i am a homeowner with a mortgage. i am concerned about our stock of housing supply. i am a member of hac. i do support the purpose. i believe that these automobile related spaces could lead to a faster approval time. i also think the approach would be more likely to be welcomed to a specific community. it would improve appearance, bankruptcy in the neighborhood. -- diversity in the neighborhood. we need housing at all level in san francisco, right now i am not overly concerned about the percentage of affordability for these units that would

presumably be small, four units of housing. thank you for listening. >> next caller, please. >> we are a member organization of the planning coalition. i appreciate supervisor preston's comments for high standards of affordability. the lack of discussion on this legislation. we will not asking for anything in return. we should discussing a approach for 100% affordable housing. legislation you are hearing is proposed works against our vision. re-purposing for new opportunities for blue collar jobs with make this conversation a quality discussion. we need more time to discuss

what this would look look. it is important for blue collar jobs. we use these and people are homeless. these are held by people of color the divide between the poor and rich. we need housing that is affordable. we urge you to table this legislation to work together an approach that is 100% affordable housing development. >> five listeners. two in the queue. next caller, please. >> caller: good afternoon. i am a d3 resident. hard to imagine a greater change than converting lots for cars to shelter. we have a choice. we can continue down the path that means pushing san franciscans further and further from the jobs that give them a

living, entertainment, restaurants that give them joy and family that gives lives meaning. this has pushed housing costs to the stratosphere to pollute the automobiles that choke awakenvironmental sustainability. as a result these past transportation systems spiral. inconvenience of items. the alternative is system with enough homes to live where they want to. live close to jobs, amenities and loved ones with abundant housing into cars into public transit systems to make this its own return. the greener, cheaper lifestyles as much housing as we can build near all of the things that may being lives valuable this. is one step in that alternative

direction when all lots can earn approval. i encourage of the passage of legislation before you today. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: good afternoon, supervisors. corey smith on behalf of the housing action coalition. i have spoken previously in support of the legislation. we need to do everything we can to intensify changing from automotive uses to housing for people. the line of questioning. i was listening. i totally agree. we should always use research and facts to help drive policy. there is a variety of item was that have been discussed buy-in committee and the board thinking about reconvening the technical

advisory committee to explore what inclusionary rates city-wide. years ago and things got delayed. there is a good opportunity there to make sure we are using the information that we have at our fingertips. the experts to figure out what is the optimal inclusion percentage based on what we are doing in certain situations. that process is all cost associated with the project. it does make sense that we can add other valuable pieces like inclusionary on site affordable housing. what i am concerned about is going over the top of that mountain to push projects to the point of infeasibility. that is what we are seeing now with the number of projects in the pipeline that we're approved but no longer work because the overall cost package with

actions good thinks but infrastructure. parking, affordable housing that everybody wants f.the cost is too high then figuring out that perfect in management. [indiscernable] >> that completing the queue. >> chair melgar: thank you. with that public comment is closed. supervisor peskin. >> i am happy to move amendments. i want to concur, madam chair. i guess politely to say, look, the way it works here regardless of the substance of the legislation where various political actors are at is when you offer a piece of legislation, you show up to talk about and answer questions regarding that legislation. i don't know if this is by

design. with all due respect it looks like you are 75 feet from here sitting in your office. i don't know why you want be in the board chambers. this is rather odd and perplexing. we had a very good policy conversation. i appreciate planning department staff for being available and responding to supervisor preston's very well stated policy comments and concerns and i appreciate the work we did earlier around the amendments i will offer and we presumably pass. this is quite odd you are not here to talk about your own legislation. >> chair melgar: did you want to go ahead and move this? >> supervisor preston: i lieu

move the previously discussed amendments with regard to rm, rc, hd. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> peskin. >> aye. >> melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> supervisor preston. >> supervisor preston: i concur with supervisor peskin's comment. none of these are a surprise. they have been discussed. there is a way to seriously do policy, build consensus, workout details of legislation and have it presented in committee and move forward. especially a issue with broad agreement. i don't think you will find a member of the board of supervisors that does not want to take car serving, gas stations and figure out ways to

create housing and maximize the amount of affordable housing there. i will just say for this one supervisor not well-taken. i think the message and the strategy is loud and clear here which is that rather than do the serious work about looking at how much affordable housing we can get up zoning. a conversation this city was once able to have before my time on the board between planning, former mayors, board of supervisors. i think the question was how much of an increase should we be seeking in the commitment? we have now moved to where we center legislation announced with great fanfare, by press release, eager to pick it up. intentionally written without even addressing the issue on

everyone's mind which is housing affordability. no feasibility study, no analysis whatsoever. then not showing up at the hearing to talk about it. the only conclusion i draw and i would love to be proven wrong. the mayor's office is not serious at this moment be in time about moving this legislation forward and seems to have decided that it is more politically advantageous to force the board in a position for the legislation we need to continue items and then that predictably follows with additional attacks on this committee and the board. i hope we can talk seriously about how to create more affordable housing to get the most out of up zoning. speaking for just myself it is frustrating that we can't be in a position to have a serious conversation about this because the mayor's office did not show

up with the people working on this legislation to address the land use and transportation committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. >> chair melgar: thank you, supervisor preston. i want to chime in to say this committee has done some great work in the last few months. we have waited through a lot of contentious policy debates to move forward with the consensus. i am hoping we can do the same for this legislation, but i think it is crucial to do that to be able to in face the issues and have answers to questions if there is a point at which affordability or the build ability of the lot is not feasible because of any increased affordability. we need to look at the numbers and answer those questions. i am addressing the public

comments that said that. i hope i am going to make a motion we continue to july 11th. when we come back we have answers to the questions raised during this meeting. i will continue to work with the mayor's office to make sure when it comes back things are ready both in terms of questions you raise, supervisor preston, supervisor peskin in terms of the relationship to the legislation, the scenario you came up with. the puds. let's continue this to july 11. >> on the motion made by chair melgar to continue item 4 as amended to the 7/11 meeting.

>> preston, melgar and preston. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> three. ordinance amending the planning code to create electric vehicle charging location and fleet charging as automotive uses, allow conversion of auto motivesertrations to electric vehicle charging locations. >> we already took publicment. >> chair melgar: we were waiting to hear from city attorney pearson. >> we weren't able to finalize. would you continue for introduction next time. >> supervisor peskin. >> i was hoping to do it on the fly. we can't and shouldn't be.

this may be too early to ask. are these -- do you think these are non substantive we can do them. the question is when you go from p to c that may be substantive. deputy city attorney star says we are good. >> it is premature for me to weigh in on it. i would like to speak with rob to better understand the impact of the changes. i will hold off on answering that question. >> supervisor preston: god willing they will be non substantive and we can get them out the door next time. >> chair melgar: continue to july 11th, madam clerk. >> on that motion supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> preston. >> aye. >> melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> chair melgar: that passes. do we have any other item on the

agenda today? >> that completes the agenda today. >> chair melgar: we are now adjourned. thank you.

>> my name is sylvia and i'm the owner of the mexican bistro. we have been in business for 18 years and we first opened on garry street in san francisco, and now we are located in a beautiful historic building. and we are part of the historical building founded in 1776. at the same time as the mission delores in san francisco. (♪♪) our specialty food is food from central mexico. it's a high-end mexican food based on quality and fresh ingredients. we have an amazing chef from yucatán and we specialize on molotov, that are made with pumpkin seeds.

and we're also known for handmade tortillas and we make our own fresh salsa. and we have cocktails, and we have many in the bar. we have specialty drinks and they are very flavorrable and very authentic. some of them are spicy, some are sour, but, again, we offer high-quality ingredients on our drinks as well. (♪♪) we have been in san francisco for 27 years, and our hearts are here. we are from mexico, but after 27 years, we feel part of the community of san francisco. it is very important for us to be the change, the positive change that is happening in san francisco. the presidio in particular, they're doing great efforts to

bring back san francisco, what it was. a lot of tourism and a lot of new restaurants and the new companies. san francisco is international and has a lot of potential. (♪♪) so you want to try authentic mexican food and i invite you to come to our bistro located on 50 moroo avenue in presidio. and i'll wait here with my open arms and giving you a welcome to try my food. (♪♪)

>> one more statement. we are the one. that is our first single that we made. that is our opinion. >> i can't argue with you. >> you are responsible please do not know his exact. [♪♪♪] [♪♪♪] [♪♪♪] >> i had a break when i was on a major label for my musical career.

i took a seven year break. and then i came back. i worked in the library for a long time. when i started working the san francisco history centre, i noticed they had the hippie collection. i thought, if they have a hippie collection, they really need to have a punk collection as well. so i talked to the city archivist who is my boss. she was very interested. one of the things that i wanted to get to the library was the avengers collection. this is definitely a valuable poster. because it is petty bone. it has that weird look because it was framed. it had something acid on it and something not acid framing it. we had to bring all of this stuff that had been piling up in my life here and make sure that the important parts of it got archived. it wasn't a big stretch for them to start collecting in the area of punk.

we have a lot of great photos and flyers from that area and that. that i could donate myself. from they're, i decided, you know, why not pursue other people and other bands and get them to donate as well? the historic moments in san francisco, punk history, is the sex pistols concert which was at winterland. [♪♪♪] it brought all of the punks on the web -- west coast to san francisco to see this show. the sex pistols played the east coast and then they play texas and a few places in the south and then they came directly to san francisco. they skipped l.a. and they skipped most of the media centres. san francisco was really the biggest show for them pick it was their biggest show ever. their tour manager was interested in managing the adventures, my band. we were asked to open to support the pistols way to that show. and the nuns were also asked to open the show. it was certainly the biggest crowd that we had ever played

to. it was kind of terrifying but it did bring people all the way from vancouver, tee seattle, portland, san diego, all up and down the coast, and l.a., obviously. to san francisco to see this show. there are a lot of people who say that after they saw this show they thought they would start their own band. it was a great jumping off point for a lot of west coast punk. it was also, the pistols' last show. in a way, it was the end of one era of punk and the beginning of a new one. the city of san francisco didn't necessarily support punk rock. [♪♪♪] >> last, but certainly not least is a jell-o be opera. they are the punk rock candidate of the lead singer called the dead kennedys. >> if we are blaming anybody in san francisco, we will just blame the dead kennedys.

>> there you go. >> we had situations where concerts were cancelled due to flyers, obscene flyers that the city was thought -- that he thought was obscene that had been put up. the city of san francisco has come around to embrace it's musicians. when they have the centennial for city hall, they brought in all kinds of local musicians and i got to perform at that. that was, at -- in a way, and appreciation from the city of san francisco for the musical legends. i feel like a lot of people in san francisco don't realize what resources there are at the library. we had a film series, the s.f. punk film series that i put together. it was nearly sold out every single night. people were so appreciative that someone was bringing this for them. it is free. everything in the library is free. >> it it is also a film producer who has a film coming out. maybe in 2018 about crime.

what is the title of it? >> it is called san francisco first and only rock 'n' roll movie. crime, 1978. [laughter] >> when i first went to the art institute before the adventures were formed in 77, i was going to be a painter. i did not know i would turn into a punk singer. i got back into painting and i mostly do portraiture and figurative painting. one of the things about this job here is i discovered some great resources for images for my painting. i was looking through these mug shot books that we have here that are from the 1920s. i did a whole series of a mug shot paintings from those books. they are in the san francisco history centre's s.f. police department records. there are so many different things that the library provides for san franciscans that i feel like a lot of people are like,

oh, i don't have a library card. i've never been there. they need to come down and check it out and find out what we have. the people who are hiding stuff in their sellers and wondering what to do with these old photos or old junk, whether it is hippie stuff or punk stuff, or stuff from their grandparents, if they bring it here to us, we can preserve it and archive it and make it available to the public in the future. i'm derek, i'm hyungry, and ready to eat. these vendors offer a variety of the streets near you. these mobile restaurants are serving up original, creative

and unusual combinations. you can grab something simple like a grilled cheese sandwich or something unique like curry. we are here in the average eight -- upper haight. you will be competing in the quick buy food challenge. an appetizer and if you are the winner you will get the title of the quick bite "chompion." i am here with matt cohen, from off the grid. >> we assembled trucks and put

them into a really unique urban settings. >> what inspired you to start off the grid? >> i was helping people lodge mobile food trucks. the work asking for what can we get -- part together? we started our first location and then from there we expanded locations. >> why do think food trucks have grown? >> i have gotten popular because the high cost of starting a brick and mortar or strong, the rise of social media, trucks can be easily located, and food trucks to offer a unique outdoor experience that is not easily replaced by any of their setting any where else in san francisco. san francisco eaters are interested in cuisine. there adventuress.

the fact they use great ingredients and make gourmet food makes unpopular. >> i have been dying to have these. >> i have had that roach coach experience. it is great they're making food they can trust. >> have you decided? >> we are in the thick of the competition? >> my game was thrown off because they pulled out of my first appetizer choice. >> how we going to crush clear? >> it will be easy. probably everyone has

tried, something bacon tell us delicious. >> -- people tell us is delicious. >> hopefully you think the same thing. >> hopefully i am going to win. we're in the financial district. there is a food truck right there. every day changes. it is easy and fun to go down. these are going to be really good. >> how are you going to dominate? >> i think he does not know what he is doing. >> i was thinking of doing [unintelligible] we are underrepresented. >> i was singing of starting an irish pub. that was my idea. >> one our biggest is the corned beef and cabbage.

we are asking people what they're thinking in getting some feedback. >> for a lot of people i am sure this combination looks very wrong. it might not sound right on paper but when you taste it to or have it in your mouth, it is a variety. this is one of the best ways in creating community. people gather around and talk about it and get to know different cultures. that brings people together and i hope more off the grid style and people can mingle and interact and remove all our differences and work on our similarities. this creates opportunity. >> the time has come and i am very hungry. what have you got? >> i got this from on the go, a sandwich, and a caramel

cupcake. i went with home cooking. what de think? >> i will have another bite. >> sounds good. >> that was fantastic. let's start with you. >> i had the fried mac and cheese, and twinkies. i wanted to get something kind of classic with a twist on it. >> it was crispy. >> i will admit. >> want to try fried mac and cheese? >> was that the best twinkie?

>> would you say you had the winning male? >> definitely. >> no. >> you are the "chompion." clair has won. you are the first "chompion." >> they know it was me because i got a free meal. and check a map on -- check them out on facebook. take a peek at the stuff we have cut. to get our -- check out our blog. i will have

you're watching san francisco rising with chris manors. today's special guest is jeff tumlin. >> hi, i'm chris manors and you're watching san francisco rising. the show on starting, rebuilding, and reimagining our city. our guest is jeff tumlin and he's with us to talk about our transportation recovery plan and some exciting projects across the city. mr. tumlin welcome to the show. >> thank you for having me. >> i know the pandemic was particularly challenging for the m.t.a. having to balance between keeping central transportation routes open, but things have improved. how are we doing with our transportation recovery plan? >> so we just got good news this week. we're getting an extra $115 million from the american rescue plan and this is

basically the exact amount of money we finally needed in order to close the gap between now and november of 2024 when we'll have to find some additional revenue sources in order to sustain the agency. in the meantime, i finally have the confidence to be able to rapidly hire, to restore services and to make sure muni is there for san francisco's larger economic recovery because downtown san francisco doesn't work without muni. >> quite right. i guess the other impact of the pandemic was that some projects like the valencia bike improvements had to be put on hold. are we starting to gear up on those again? >> yes, so it's an interesting case study. of right before covid hit, we were about ready to invest in quick build bike lanes. arguably the most important

bike order in san francisco. that got stopped with lockdown and then as you'll recall, during covid, we invented all kinds of other new programs like shared spaces in order to support our small businesses as well as sunday street light events for neighborhood commercial streets where streets were closed off to cars and turned over to commercial activity. those successes now that they've been made permanent actually interrupt the draft design we had put together. so we've gone back to the drawing board and we are looking forward to having some additional community conversations about other design ideas for valencia. we're committed to completing a quick build project on this calendar year. >> that's such good news. valencia is a really great street for biking. so there are two huge and exciting projects that are about to be or have just been completed. let's talk about the bus rapid transit project on van ness avenue.

how extensive have the improvements been? >> what's called the van ness transit rapid project is in fact more about complete reconstruction of the street and most importantly, the 100-year-old utilities underneath the street. so all of the water, sewer, telecommunications, gas lines under the street were basically rebuilt from market street all the way to lumbard. the part on the surface which provides dedicated bus lanes for golden gate transit and muni, that was relatively straight forward and we're so excited we're going to start revenue service for muni on april 1st. >> that's fantastic. i understand there were some sidewalk improvements too. >> there were sidewalk improvements. we planted 374 trees. there is new storm water treatment including infiltration in the sidewalk, there's a bunch of art.

there's all kinds of things. we put in new street lights for the entire corridor. >> finally, the other big news is about the central subway. can you briefly describe the project and give us an update. >> yes, so the central t-line project, another stop at union square that connects directly into powell station and a final stop in the heart of chinatown at stockton and washington. that project has also run into challenges. it's 120' under muni, under bart, 120' down and out under chinatown in some unexpectedly challenging soils. but that project is nearly complete. it's at about 98% completion right now which means we're

testing trains, we're testing the elevators and escalators and the final electronics and we're still on track to open that in october presuming all of the testing continues to go well. so fingers crossed on in a one. we're really looking forward to allowing people to have a subway ride from the heart of chinatown all the way to the convention center to the caltrans station and all the way down to bayview and visitation valley. >> it's great to see all these projects coming to completion. we're all grateful for your team's hard work and i really appreciate you coming on the show, mr. tumlin. thank you for the time you've given us today. >> my pleasure. thanks for having me. >> and that's it for this episode. for sfgov tv i'm chris manors. thanks for watching.

>> president moran: good afternoon. i like to call to order the junn francisco public utilities commission. please call the roll. [ roll call ] >> clerk: vice president ajami is attending the meeting remotely.