>> welcome to the september 19 regular molting of lands use and transportation committee of the board of supervisors. i'm supervisor melt gar joined by supervisor preston and supervisor peskin. the committee clerk is erika major. i would like to acknowledge michael and [inaudible] at

sfgov.org for staff thanksgiving meeting. do you have announce ams the board and mitteeers meeting hybrid allow public comment still prosecute voidingly row mote access. the board recognizes public access is important. first comment on each item from those in person first and then move on to the call in line. for those watching on channel 26, 28, 78 or 99 ask government sfgov.org the number is streaming across the stream the number is 415-655-0001. enter access code: 2495 796 7354 ##. had connected you will hear the meeting discussion asks in listening mode only. press story 3 to be added to the

line. do keep your television and listening devices on low when you are speak. as indicated we'll tailgate comment from those in person first and go to public call in line. you may submit public comment to moiz the latched use and transportation clerk erica. major @sfgov.org if mitt it e mail tell be made a part of the official file. you may send them u.s. postal to our office at city hall.the off. you may send them u.s. postal to our office at city hall.part of. you may send them u.s. postal to our office at city hall. items academied upon today >> to add to the announcements masking is recommended not required.

police continue to be respectful of those around and you provide spacing if seated in the chamber. >> we are joined by president walton. today welcome, president walton. we will take the items out of order and have him go first. if you could call item 3. >> yes. item 3 an ordinance manying the planning code to eliminate the special use district. greater than 5 thundz square feet subject to thgz and reper se to or pdr2 direct, members of public who would like to speak need to call 415-655-0001 then . 0

access code: 2495 796 7354 ##.6 7354 ##. >> thank you. clothesil note that president with theon circulated amendments to his legislation i will turn it over to you. >> thank you, chair melgar and thank you supervisor preston and peskin for taking this out of order the protection zone special use district, ip z a stopgap measure to protection, distribution and repair business districts from higher paying residential and office use when is this area was zoned which was a permissive district allowed all uses. the zone protected pdr from competition and incompresidentable uses in eastern neighborhoods and bay view planning process it was intendsed be replaced by controls adopt in the 2 where are 08.

an oversight not to remove the ip z in 2008 it undermine the a loophole storage and big box and industrial uses that are inappropriate for pdr neighborhoods reincrease the clarity of the planning code and protect the pdr businesses it was designed for. the ordinance as proposed eliminate the ip z special use and allow social service use greater than 5,000 square feet and pdr2 districts. we got input from planning to focus on making sure we allow grandfathering of self storage projects submitted before december 31st of 21 if at least 50% of the parcels contains pdr or community uses on ground floor. there was a hearing on january

11th, or i introduced the ordinance on january 11th. to eliminate the ip intrshgs and allow for the philanthropic facility uses on march 24th the planning commission recommended a modification to allow the limited grandfathering i discussed. and so i would like to move this forward to the full board but first as supervisor chair melgar stated. i do have amendments that have been circulated that i want to read in record that would like for to you move. booij line 6, after the accept a colon add, allowing self storage and pdr2 subject to conditions. page 4 line 7 after gross square feet. strike all to the ends of sentence. page 5 line 19a to the word any and after use in the phrase that submitted a development

application on or before 12-31-21 shall be page 5 line 20 delete is before principally permitted. page 5 line 21 after adeno~ less than 50% of the parcel area consists of ground floor industrial agcullure autorepair, catering, trade shop. institutional community use or arts. >> page 6 line one replace date 6-1. 30 to 12-31-26. page 6 line 2 delete afterless the and replace with city enacts an ordinance with an effective date on or before that extends or reenacts in note. page 6 line 6 and 7 replace section with note.

thank you for your consideration and thank you chair melgar for take thanksgiving out of order. >> you thank you very much. i like to make a motion that we move the amendments as read in the referred by president walton. would you like to take public comment. first. >> of course, we would. let's do that. >> and are there members like to speak on item 3 approach the podium. we will move on to our public call in line. if you would like to speak you node to call 415-655-0001 then access code: 2495 796 7354 ##. press star 3 to enter the queue. looks like we have zero callers. >> with that, public ment is closed. now madam clerk vote on this. >> and on the motion moved by chair melgar read in the record by president walten supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston.

>> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have 3 aye's. >> and now if we could move the item as amended to the full board. >> on that motion supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. sdwr aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> 3 aye's. >> motion passes. thank you, president walton. >> if you could now call item 1. >> item 1, is a resolution authorizing the san francisco municipal transportation agency to begin setting rates for parking at goldenigate park concourse garage in kezar parking lot 6.14 and amend the let's agreement with the commune partnerships rec and park department to pay 3 hours. free parking on behalf of purchase of oozing museums for discover and gold programs at seasons and the museum. members of the public who would

like to comment on item 1 call 415-655-0001 then access code: 2495 796 7354 ##. if you would like to peek press star 3. madam chair. >> thank you. we have sarah madeline from rec and parks department and rob malone from the san francisco municipal transportation authority. thank you for being here. i will turn it over to you. >> great. thank you. good afternoon chair melgar. i'm with my clothe from the mta the resolution is follow on to the flex pricing legislation you all passed the end of last year. that legislation allowed our department to work with the mta employ flexible pricing at the concourse garage and the kezar parking lot that's when we do at the other garages we own in connection with the mta. at the time it was passed,

amended to ask that we come back to you and explain the residence loulgz the methodology and approach to rate settings we'll use in the locations. and so that is what is before you. we have out lined the up and are lower bounds as well as policy goals we would like to achieve with this flex pricing and rob and i are here to answer questions you may have. >> okay. supervisor peskin. >> thank you. as mrs. madeline and i communicates e mail and not able because i was in rules to follow up with the phone call. relative to monthly parking i don't see, there is, not suggesting change to the rates well? and not be obviously subject to fleckable parking. is that right? >> i will let rob answer this

piece. >> good afternoon rob malone mta. there was no mention of our machining low parking policy but since the question kim came up we do have a policy at all garages first of all a couple thing in terms of rates mechanic low rates are set by surveying the local area or competing facilities or lacking this is a facility that it is not have local competition. in that case compare to the other facilities around the city. the other thing we do is close low monitor the balance the equalization moum month lows are using the garage versus transient parkers the daily parkers are using the facility. in the case of this garage. there are only about 25 monthly

parkers. out of a facility over 800 stall its does not seem like one i would be concerned about use by amongly parkers infringing on daily parkers being able to use it. it is part of our quarter low review process of all rates and garages that we look at that upon bvenlts and at certain facilities men a third of the 21 facilities we manage we put a cap on the number of arc luable amongly park and institute a waiting list for this reasoning. we want to ensure there is a certain amount of availability for transient parkers all times of day. >> thank you. >> you are welcome. >> i had a question related to this. when we had a hearing in the

neighborhood service committee about the museums. you may -- watching there was a lot of public comment. one of the things that the fine art's museum director of the deyoung said was this they had not really explored some of the creative -- things that -- other mull seems the academy of sciences doing for example offering subsidies for bike share. i wonder if the way that the program is configured, now, is open to do this partnership with the museum if they were if they chose to you know subsidize the machining low parking for employees as a benefit or any number of things configured to do in? >> absolutely. access control system heads all

sorts of serious capabilities for instituting the types of things and all facilities we work closely with local stake holders. and in the case of here i would presume. we have been with rec and park department staff rowing with representatives of the mccp and museums and as presumed we would be communicating with them regular low. and if not just responding to any requests they have i think we would be suggesting or ask them to consider hey, here are some things we do else where sheing use the technology to help it the technology helps you want it easy for employees. if you are going to offer what you are suggesting a partial low subsidized program. we are used to doing the things

regularly. going back to the passage of 6 or 7 years ago of increased bicycle parking ordinance that planning echoed, we very actively personally lead the expansion of bicycle park nothing all of our garages. we spent a lot of time think about that providing stationary racks and some cases day use compatible bicycle lookers the membership card you access for a fee per hour if you like more security method of parking. worked on bicycle way finding. if you have this bicycle parking you want the bicyclist to know this is there and how to finds it. we spent a lot of time the last several years working on that and would engage with the

museums and other local stake holders on all of those issues. >> thank you, i wanted to ask once you get authorization what is the time line before this gets get implemented. i would like to defer to ms. madeline to answer that one. it is negotiations with the mccp, et cetera . >> thank you. >> sure. so our lease with the mccp the nonprofit that runs the garage and the resolution our commission rec and park adopted supporting bring thanksgiving legislation to the board. requires the approval of the mccp board as rob noted we have been working with them the last couple of months talk about policy priorities. rob reviewed the actuals the last few months and well in the black, which is a change from the last time we were all here

talking about this. we were deep in the 3s of covid and struggling. so we need to present this to the board, i believe of i believe meets the ends of this year. and then could begin implementation from there. >> okay. thank you very much. any other questions, clothes? okay. madam clerk public comment. >> thank you, members who would like to peek on this item approach the podium. seeing no members of public we will move on to the public call in line we have 4 listeners with one in the queue. go ahead and unmute the first caller, please. >> daved pill pel. so it seems that may be a bit premature to consider this item before the november election with prop i, j and n.

which the -- golden gate park and -- regards to the relationship between the city and the concourse garage and mccp. so -- i'm just worning out loud had makes sense to do this now or wait to see the results of the november election if they are not meeting until later in the year. perhaps there is staff work that mta and rec park can do in advance and then see what the election results are. i'm also wondering where the detail is on the specific proposed rates. i saw ranges but not an actual proposed rate schedule that will be before mta and rec and park and mccp board. and as to what the rates are. the number of vehicles. mr. malone mentioned there are

25 month low parkers and how this goes to meeting operating expenses. for the garage and separate low for the kezar parking lot part of rec park's parking portfolio. and finally on page 2, line 9 and page 3, line 2; it seemed that there were a couple of typos. if i get to that one moment. sorry on page 2 line 9, was the beta beach resolution in 21 or 22 i couldn't remember and pagely line 2 [inaudible] thank you for your comments. >> that concludes the queue.

>> there are no long are any callers in the queue >> thank you. with that public comment is closed. >> would anybody like to make a motion? okay. i will make a motion. >> page 2 line 9? i have been in this room all day. >> sorry. i'd like to make a motion that we can we send this to the full board with positive recommendation. on that motion supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston.

>> aye >> melgar. >> aye. >> 3 aye's >> that motion passes. diclose public comment. >> madam clerk thank you very much, mrs. madeline. let's go to item 2, police. joanne ordinance amending the planning to create the tenderloin neon special use special sign district with north of market special use district and acting zoning controls for neon signs within the special district and amending sf01 to show the loyal loyal special sign district and affirming findings. member who is wish to provide comment call 415-655-0001 access code: 2495 796 7354 ##. if you have in the done so and would like to speak you need to press star 3

>> supervisor preston thank you the floor is yours >> thank you chair melgar and for calendaring this and back. >> nothing of substance to add we talked about the amendments those required a continuance and hope to move this forward. >> thank you. >> add mow as a cosponsor this is exciting. madam clerk let's go to public comment. why are there members withhold like to speak on item 2. approach the podium. seeing none we move to the call in line it electric like there are 4 listeners with 0 in the queue. >> with that public comment is closed. supervisor preston. >> thank you i'd like to move this with recommendation to the full board as a committee report. >> and on that motion supervisor

peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have throw an aye >> that motion passes. >> thank you. congratulations supervisor. >> let's go to item 4, please. >> item 4 is designating the -- cork oak tree right-of-way of 20th at noe street a landmark tree pursuant to public work and making finings member who is would like to comment call 415-655-0001 then access code: 2495 796 7354 ##. press star 3 to enter the queue. thank you. this is supervisor mandelman's item. and he is not here. is there someone from his office online? to present?

>> mr. du want to say a few word busy this item? there he is. supervisor mandelman is on his way. he just walked in thank you very much. >> welcome supervisor mandelman i'm sorry if we caught you a bit by prize we are moving quickly. >> you are. >> that's good. all right. we have a tree landmarking. um -- 20th and noe. so clothes today i'm asking for your positive recommendation on

an ordinance directing the department public ws to designate the cork oak tree at 20let approximate nory noe as a landmarkistry. it is located in public right of way at community garden the neighbors who love and min tain the garden kicked off the process for the tree by organizing a petition with 50 signatures and propped my office for support on august 24 the forest council received a landmark tree nomination from public works and on september 22nd it met the landmark criteria for land mark tree status. it has been there for 75 years. much love exclude based on neighbors i heard from the community is looking forward to its land marking the improve am

club has been actively advocating around this and the neighbors who advocated for the lands marking david dias is here and served lead gardener at community garden are eager for us to take this step i want to thank ross green and his office for w and i hope it is straightforward. but thank you for your consideration. >> thank you supervisor mandelman. let's take public comment if there is no comments or questions from colleagues. >> thank you. members who would like to speak on item 5 node to prop the podium. >> good afternoon. everybody. supervisor, thank you for your support from the office. >> this is a fantastic and beautiful tree.

it is a cork oak tree harvested cork stoppers and makes them in portugal. this tree is the biggest cork oak in the city. on behalf of our community and myself we are looking forward to your recommendation in the findings. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. are there others this would like to spoke on item 4? >> we am move on to the public call in line. it looks like we have zero callers. madam chair. >> public comment is now closed. >> make a motion we move this to the full board with positive recommendation. >> on that motion supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar.

>> aye. >> thank you. congratulations supervisor mandelman. let's move on to item 5. >> item 5 an ordinance amending the planning code rezone r heart attack 1 zoning except for residential 1rh1 to rh2 zoning to rezone rh1d to districts residential 2 family district detached rh2 and dense limit exceptions to 4 dwelling per lot and up to 6 per lot in corner lotted amending the administrative code to subdividing constructing new units to the density exception and appropriate findings. members withhold like to speak need to call 415-655-0001, access code: 2495 796 7354 ## then star 3 to enter the queue.

if you have not done so would like to speak you mode to press star 3. >> thank you very much. supervisor mandelman, thank you for bringing back this item. no, i wanted say something about this. because i think that this the public chatter. in the press about disfunction of the board of prierzs, this is a legislative process what we are supposed to be doing a city that is diverse people have different opinions and our process is designed for us to you know -- amend things and negotiate things and come up with manage we can live with. our mayor veto third degree and you become and finds what can you know move forward. have us make progress on the issue and add housing and

preserving neighborhoods and protecting communities. i think that it is good. thank you for bringing it back. >> i agree i think it is person for this board to finds ways to achievon census and put forward legislation this moves the city in a good direction. i pelt thisy had done this with the version of the legislation that was voted out. it include the aspects i did in the love and did in the have everything i might have wanted. but it was i think a consensus. and we were not able to get the other branch of our local government on board. with it. and i thought that quite a bit about why and how that happened and whether there motive not be

piece of this or even all of the pieces of this we might be able to get financial we change them and think about them. i had conversations with the mayor's office and with some of my colleagues. i look back on my failures with this legislation i think i tried do too much. this legislation or the legislation was approved by the board eliminated rh1 zoning in san francisco in 2 ways. it made rh2 the base zoning for rh zones. the second was created a path to mall apartment buildings in every neighborhood in san francisco. 4-6, 4 on corners.

property owners could pursue. and i don't think this was going to lead to massive transformation of the housing stock but it was opening the door to gradual. denseification. link the 2 proposals together made this legislation weaker than the sum of the parts. hai wanted to visit with you about today is whether it might make sense to peel those to pieces arc part and see where we can get with each of them. ir think it is important for you all to -- may be to run through what is in 41 of the committee now. it had changed a little bit after this file was created and so there are aspects of legislation that was voted out of the committee last time that

are not in the version that is before you. i will run through what is in and in the in. included the original is the original density exception in all rh to go up to 4 units per lot and the planning recommendation 6 unitos corner lots and to rezone all rh1 to rh2 and create a path in the subdivision code to create new cono units on lot obtaining the afternoon unit as long as the homeowner resides on site for 3 years after construction. that is all in here. it includes amendments made pie supervisor melgar rezone rh1d and rh2d. as well as to apply rent control to units in the density program.

and language added by mecar requiring the planning department to prepare an r. sum rising applicable design guidines and fee waiver for homeowners classified a historic resource before renovation plans for density exception and this version includes unit size requirements add in the by consensus among the committee and supervisor mar requiring one of the density exceptions to be 2 bedrooms or a third the size of the largest unit on site. there are things that are not in the file before you. and some of them i knowledge absolutely ought to be addd and we circulated amendmented add those back in. and i think you could take action today if you wanted to. the version of the ordinance before you does in the include the reporting

>> reporter:s for planning supervisor mar add immediate and that seems like a thing that should be in. and there was reason control clean up language that needed to get out of that i believe the chair pointed identifyd and this needs to get added back in. and the last thing which i have not propose in the an amendment i would like to hear feedback and i continuing is simple you could act on today if you wanted but you may want to think about it some. was the addition of the 5 year ownership provision added in. and the reason i ask to you think about this -- one is -- i mean well this was the thing in the legislation i did not love but felt important part of reaching consensus. i think this this is a provision that will get us another mayoral

veto if we keep with the 5. if the committee and board are willing to get rid of the 5 i believe the mayor would sign. at least this part of it may be not rh1 to 2 and sign this part of it. and you know we could try between wherevero and 5 and see how they did with that. but that is the thing for the committee to think about. and then the other thing i would ask that the committee do is a split the file with the 2. the rh1 to 2 in one piece and everything else in another piece of legislation. because i of course they have different issues and different o opponents and a matter of vote counting. in terms of over riding the inevitable mayoral veto i think

this committee might want to consider.

if there of a carve out that say project and would you may want to continueen if you act on the other things you may want to continue to give time to think about this before you vote it out. but any carve out would require at least a few weeks. >> thank you. so much. supervisor mandelman. supervisor peskin. >> thank you chair melgar at the board of supervisors when we considered the veto over ride i expressed my unique frustration having been around for vetoes are seldom in 15 years are is one or two a year i have been around for 20 or 30 of them in that area but -- they have always accompanied by some

amount of advice. andllow the chair to supervisor mandelman i feel this is a bit like blinds folded and swinging at a piniata. so -- you sounds like you represent that you have talked to the mayor. and if the issue is the 5 year look back. is it really? i could i could revisit that. buoy want to know if this is one and done. i don't want to be played the fool we are here guessing. now i appreciate your candor as to the rh worn and 2 political conciliation which is i hate doing planning on district lines i find it abhorrant.

but as a political situation if it gets the board to 8 i could consider that. but as for the first part in a separate piece of legislation as somehow bite sized pieces are palatable than the whole; is turning 5 years less then and there 5 years are we done? >> through the chair? if you want to answer, yes. of course. >> my understanding is the 2 piece of this legislation to which the mayor and her office object rezoning of 1 to 2 and the 5 year look back. if we were to sends her legislation that did not have those elements in it. she would not object to allowing you know allow up to 4 units on lots african-american

the city with all the protections and rent control and the things the board built in and sign that. >> if i may chair megovern to keep the floor, part of this to me is -- the rudeamentary 6 or 8 politics the largest is public policy and the author supervisor mandelman was reading off all these thing and saying there were melgar amendment and preston amendment dids in the say peskin amendments i think i did have one which was a minor clarification to the look back amendment as to taking in the determining who or what errors were. >> but other than that i have think i said this i appreciated

the way that chair melgar was stewards what started out as 3 competing piece of legislation work. i think we landed on the most permissive one. and -- with -- kinds of sort of not really data from the planning department it was become in envelope stuff. and -- having been around the elfat for a long, long time and having advocated repeatedly for a long time to the reform at the state level, none. which successful it turns out both houses of the legislator are super majority democrats there are enough that are controlled by big rolls royce they mine as well tell the truth and call themselves republicans. all of that not with standing

when we pushed for is that kind of look back. and we did that based on role data not the envelope data what a holding period should be and what the number of are in year 1 and 2 and bla, bla, bla. my recollection i have not looked for a time, is they happen pretty quick because people speculators like to make a buck quick. so -- based on that data there is a separate and apart from the political calculations i may finds my way down to 5 years to where the sweet spot is. but i don't want to just get a win for having a win sake i want to achieve more housing without

ripping the lives of people it is under. the sweet spot would be, i don't know i like to look. i remember clearly in a number of the conversations real data supervisor preston may have been i have not talked to him about this body of policies since it left here last time but -- i'd like to look at the number. >> a couple of points to you know respond to what you said, supervisor mandelman. as to the first of your goals of rh1 to 2, as i remember after reading the mayor's letter there were 2 issues. besides what you talked about i

understood the second to be sb9 and the -- feature in sb9 that stream lines these projects and so peculiar low around the ability of neighbors to do dr or offer dr after a project has been considered. you know code compliant and whatever. i that is in the something that is skrnl in the legislation. but i wanted bring it up i did read that. the second thing is i don't think that what we are talking about is the same. because these are homeowner occupied units and people have equity. most case quite a bit our real estate values have gone way up.

and really through no effort of our own but in terms of the displacement pressures that tenabilities pace it is not the same. i wanted make sure that just putting out my analysis out there. the thing about a carve outside i share that with president walon i don't know to supervisor peskin's comments like district wide i want to get it right. not because of the district it is the fact that black people were kept from owning property. in this country single family homes and kept from having lones

and there was a system through our federal government that preventd that. that is the last enclave of black homeownership in san francisco. if we would talk about carve out it would protect yours that were historically you know -- prevented from that. i would want to get it right and have the conversations approximate electric at the data. on the flip side i will say that we are preventingly the property owners from you know -- getting the value of that victim in a way this we are not doing for the other property owners and you know i want to have a pro robust discussion about this that is also an equity issue. i'm not saying i have answer either way. but i wanted put it out there that what we are doing is not

just, oh , you know let's get that one more vote. i want us to dive into the public policy of the zoning and economic issues. so -- with that i will turn it over to supervisor preston. >> thank you. and -- through the chair to supervisor peskin, i recall that report because i was an author of this report with the wonderful antieviction mapping project this put together the data showing the huge number of those occurring over half of them within the first year of ownership. and it is not apples to apples but there are somewhere purpose

there. with both of those. i say on the bill a huge shout out to i have no yet. i know but i was going to say no idea how former senator left laneo managed get this bill it was the left one like off the senate floor in 2014 against what supervisor mess mess identifyd that real estate industry controlled democrats and republicans in sacramento. die exclude that was the end. i think it is does offer lessons on the issue this is discussed. at 5 years and the start and there were a lot of discussions what the appropriate length was this got short circuited once it was time to make the amendments in the assembly and killed there. that was in the a veto but i

think that getting the number of years right is something i'm wide upon open to which i continuing needs to serve the purpose and certainly open if there is a different number of years. 5 was what we proposed left time. made sense. if there was data to inform that i'm open >> thanks to supervisor mandelman and his team and chair melgar time and energy that has gone in this and echo the disappointment not so much in a veto the mayor has the violet if she objects to it but the lack of the voteo letter the guidance this peskin noted to allow us to take that and know when we are dealing with. the way to shape it it meets with her approval or is there a

path you know to 8 where her approval is not required? and i appreciate your work in engaging with the mayor's office. i did ask the mir's office to have someone here i believe paulino is on and love to hear directly from the mayor's office. i just i we are here to do the work and happy to have the hearings i don't want to speak to the chair we are happy to dive in but we have important things to do and it would be great if we hear from the mayor's office more than just the last version imposed financial barriers. can we through the chair can you give some guidance as to -- the

i guess a response to what supervisor mandelman lid out and public ly -- commit to what would and would not meet with the mayor's approval with respect to this legislation? thank you. noted our office is working with him and his office. she mentioned in the closing of her letter work with the author and the members of the board to produce legislation that answered her helping goals and stount housing and producing more housing. as to the urth so farz the 2 items that noted with regards to the look back and rh1 and 2, are correct those other 2 points.

our office eye highlighted. as far as specifics to the final language the mayor need to look at the final proposal the final draft proposal before call it we would work with the author on this. >> thank you. and through the chair to clarify the position with regard to look back that the existence of any look back period would -- make this something that the mayor would veto or well is an objection to a 5 year look back period. >> i can't give you a hard number as far as the number 5 is the one that i would say was not the mayor was not arc menable 2 a number with this i can't speak to that. >> okay i think what you say is not the existence of a look back provision it is just that the 5

year look back period is a nonstarter with the mayor. i don't want to put word in your mouth am i getting it right? >> you are correct. >> thank you. >> supervisor mandelman. >> thank you chair melgar and colleagues for engaging again on this legislation to supervisor melgar's points. yes, the mayor i would agree does not object to the rezoning from between 2 to 2 of itself it is the fact that by as i and disagree with her on this, she believes sb9 is an important and valuable tool for increasing density in san francisco and that we make a mistake by giving

up that tool and e eliminating rh1 begin it is the only place where sb9 would be effective. ir reiterate that overwhelmingly the applications this as well come in almost a year since sb9 in affect either duplexes or lot splits not the 2 together. it is a small number less than 20 applications have come in. and i think that the notion of ministerial prove of duplexes that could be monster homes with you know -- 5-700 grandma unit attached never occupied is in the a high priority for me to stream line. i think that small and medium sized apartment building node to be stream lined in the city.

the developer of learning project and the burdens on communities. i think the smallest projects that in my district tend to be very learning homes for wealthy people. i think some level of discretion to shape those is important to retain. i have a disagreement. we could i believe in stroll lining and talked about this left week. and i'm gearing up to bring this committee you know a conversation about stroll lining small and medium sized apartments. but i think as i said there is already too much in this proposal. and i think trying to add in a stream lining measure that we would craft here and lay are that on and get 8 votes plus the mir is a level of brain damage i conditional take on in this

legislation. well there is zero which what the mayorments and then 5 what might be between the 2 and i suspect this will get continued. you know there is time for my office to do diplomacy with the per se's office and supervisors who may want to try to reupon tain look back for the role it can play and we can use that time to engage with the issues that chair melgar raised about the 18 equitable implications of carving out communities of concern and leaving property owners of color in those in

those neighborhoods unable to get value out of property that neighbors in other parts of the city men able to get if we do carve outs. i don't see how we get to 8 without carve outs. but there are problems. i feel like -- many conversations node to be had with several colleagues. listening to your analysis and you know i see it from your perspective being sat through. and left my brain in time thursday evening at planning. i saw a lot of projects that came to us either because at the beginning or the ends through the discretionary review in neighborhoods like those you represent.

most were in district 8. that upon were monster homes with a signy adu that was 400 square feet like calling to fit. right. and but in a neighborhood that are not -- asathyy where the real estate value is in the as high. we did see a lot of the more equitable like 2 unit properties even if it was an adu because that you know that is hat market would bear. so, just back to you in crafting this how do we create legislation that encourages this. knowing this they are very different and various angles. so i want to make sure that -- homeowners who want to have

their extended family live in the property. have children be able to you know move to the home or the property that they own. can raise their own families i want to make sure that happens we don't having sat through late nights neighbor on neighbor. make sure we allow for opportunity to have better sustainable use of space. especially given discs shifts this are happening in communities of multieye generational living. at the same time as we address the reaity you are talking about. you have know purwhich is ingpu

out there i don't think there is nothing to the stroll lining conversations. there is there are way in which folks want to prevent neighbors from having code compliant project buzz they are in the way of vows or whatever. i want to claesz that as well. supervisor precinct. just wanted to say a few more words about the look back which have come up a few times i guess we should explain to the public look back we are talking about how long whether a period of time you have to own the property before you can access the up zone to deter real estate peck laters from buying property

to demolish it and increase the number of units there. so but i want to emphasize one thing as the caution and i just am trying to have a void wasting a lot of time down the road on this. it is in the just a member's game game. i don't think it is mayor wants zero. supervisors want 5. i think to the point supervisor peskin made i do think there is a policy question this we as a board and the mayor have to grapple with. is the goal to deter real estate speculators from buying, dell demolishing and building higher density or not. i think there are different views on that. the concern you have a number in the amount of time that is low it does not deter that

speculation. we can spend time figure out in the finance like what the football horizon is and talk to professionals and planning and figure out, okay here is the sweet spot. that was the analysis they are in the about the building if x number of years they wait and a year notice period after. we did that. that is time consuming we can do that. but i guess what i want to highlight is -- i'm not sure we are in the same place. with the board and deregulation crowd when it come to housing the market. i think that -- i think that those folks continuing is fine.

to create a market incentive a rolls royce peck later buys property of the as language as they build moreen if they are market rate x. i want to name that because while i'm help to have the conversations i feel strongly we need to be deterring the real estate speculation which could threaten to buy up neighborhoods demolish neighborhoods in the name of building market rate housing and i think whatever that number is and i'm not stuck on 5. if well is something else this makes sense that will be what guides me in terms of arriving at this aim of time to make sure it does have an antispeck welltive function. i think we all don't agree or

define things the same. i upon don't think that we had define whatted is speculation. is it any profit of a developer? what degree is it 25% or 30%. i think that part of we have not done the analysis if it is 3 unit or forethe building code requires you put in an elevator. there is prosecute forma this would trig are that analysis you know from my point whether this is speck welltive or part of like the capitolism that you know is part of our for you know whatever. it is how we currently -- have configured the housing stock. i think that -- you know we --

have not i don't know whether it is a year or no years or 5 years. i'm not comfortable saying it is all speculation or not because we have not didn't numbers we have not gotten there and we need more guidance in this way. i don't know if supervisor mandelmanments to you know engage. planning or folks and doing number crunching. i add that we don't have the 4u know large buildings irrelevant. we have never said this is an unacceptable rate of return for our somebody's investment and therefore we will not allow it. i mean we have put in community benefits we expect in terms of upon inclusionary. and this

stuff i don't want to drudge you have the year. i wanted to pin out that if we will be coming up with definitions to say this is when we want or this is when we don't want it might be able to define in a better way. because you know you know if the goal is to take all profit i don't believe that anything will happen. i money that is the way that we deal with housing in our country not just in san francisco. and if we are going to say this is when we want or what we don't want we should define it better. supervisor preston. >> i appreciate the comments and we should conversation we have be having and defining that speculation we are trying to prevent and from other forms of

development they may profit may not be when we are trying to deter. i think we did try to tackle that and we had an interesting conversation with safai and mandelman on this topic. supervisor safai was more open to the yes of investor buying demolishing and building was up front. what we ended up with with the amendments focussed on trying to prioritize supporting homeowners and developing their property and creating density and you spoke about the creation of that wealth and supporting existing property ordinance. that is -- and there is language in subsection 0 at the time it is in the public interest to help the home ordinance like the

adu's that was i think this is the pregnant we were on. and we were trying to disincentivize the buy it knock it down build speculator. and if there are shades of gray we should address them but i think it would be a shift from where we landed before if we are now going to -- embrace the purchase for purpose of demolition as a policy goal of the ordinance. it is good we are talking about it i think that gets to the heart of it and i appreciate the diawilling on this. i think it will continue i really i wanted to highlight it because i don't think it is like split the difference thing. we need to figure out when we are trying to prevent.

and made surety look back period complies with that. >> supervisor mandelman you talked about demolitions as your legislation. >> well, i mean there is built in a number of the standards antidemolition, protections and tenant protections that are developed in sacramento as and local low as we am through how we minimize the risk displace am that is in. the i mean to be honest there is the notion that we if we are going to add housing this is i think publicly a point of difference on the board that if we are going to be adding housing in our existing built you have residential neighborhoods there over time will be demolition and building. well is demolition in my district now and i assume in

others as well. and i think we could do a better job of shaping the new housing we are get and making sure it is more likely to serve the needs of people who are not the richest people. but i think -- this legislation anticipates development not demolition includes protections against the worse aspects of demolition there will be sum as the city changes over time. i think that i don't know there are cases where a speck later is obvious that means greedy. but there are developers we will not think of extraordinary greed but a capitol not vagz.

think if we cut developers out of the project of adding density in san francisco it is going to be hard. but i don't know if we have to decide that or you all have to today. we should take public comment. what i ask for to you do is to make the amendments to get us back up to circumstantial litted this get the legislation where we were for the look back you continue it or split the file or duplicate the file so we have a piece that is the rh1 to 2 alone and then a piece that is everything else. and we can get with you chair melgar whether we want to try to do stream lining for rh1 to 2. and we can also have the

conversations about the right look back that would -- allow projects to go forward get us a together if in the a voteo and what to do about potential carve outs which would take times. i ask after this that -- sept amendments, making them as proposed and duplicate the files and continue it until your next meeting. >> to be clear the amendments you proposed are the clean up to the rent control. >> and the supervisor mar reportingly. sdwroo and split the rh1 to 2 with the rest >> so moved >> take public comment. >> thank you anyone who will like to speak approach the

podium. >> good afternoon. i have questions about all of this. what is viability of density increase on the typical san francisco lot? issues with d b information sheet eg02 and exposure and aggress shows generally. 2, what about speculation with up zoning. examples the specific low the issue raised in cashing out in the [inaudible] handing out and in october of 21 of 21 department analysis on sb9. i think the same issue for everything. 6 pluses on corners. that was what form are commissioner fung thought the best way to go about this. don't deal with the 4 flexes, 6

flex plexos appropriate corners works best. planning commission has never used the legislative authority granted to them boy the board in 2008 under section 317 demo. may 4 of 2020 you tabled board file 200451. bring that back. you are talking about more time i will talk the dem scompligz dr. hundreds of project in noe valley and the around the city. few had dr's de facto demolition. that needs to be locked at. i talked for 8 years about this. the commission as the this tort do at this time board fwaf it to them. electric at that or talk to the board or bring back the board

file to 00451 that would solve. problems. . thank you very much will good luck. again. are there others members when would like to speak on this item. we will move to the public call in line we have 8 listeners with five in the queue. if you would like to speak you need to press star 3 and it will raise your hand on our side. we can call you you. let's take the first caller. >> coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. speaking on my own behalf. joined the lawsuit against sb9. proposing legislation to amplify it. thank you. >> thank you. >> let's take the next caller.

good afternoon jake price on blafl housing action coalition we are excited see it continue to address zoning in the city and like to say the effective zoning reform take into account economic feasibility. provide approvals incorporate sufficient density. and address other unnecessary regulation that could impact effectiveness. i love to hear from the entireses with the goal and if it is to housing how much housing do you want to to create. thank you. >> great. david again and if i can get i 30 second warning i don't weigh in on lands use and don't want to start i was listen to this conversation. wants to comment on one aspect this mandelman discusses i

believe on page 21 of legislation in section 1396.6. online 21. the notion of a subviolator for a period of 3 years and triggers things and waivers and fees and waiver fees prioritizing, et cetera . i'm just interested in understanding -- if that affidavit only declaires their intent and if the circumstances change for that person due to illness or a medical condition. need for rehappen the death of that person or relative other economic ts what affect that has

relative to this can have the if just saying i intend to but if circumstances change. if it has no affect after the approvals i'm trying to understand that whether 3 or 5 years or any period of time. thank you. what the point of the affidavit was. i'm not weigh nothing on the rest. thank you for listening. why thank you. take the next caller, please. good afternoon supervisors i'm robin i'm a volunteer and tracking housing. worried for the housing element affordable housing [inaudible] state makes available to ecstasy with the certified element [inaudible] the board is not

care what we think about the state. on july 21st after the mayor vetoed the [inaudible]. california d. housing and communities development put out a press release applauding the veto they will obey state housing law. i never seen put out an announce am like that. this was a warning about the housing element. they will review element in a few months and said that legislation in this room was not a front to state law. changes to the building discussed today were not made [inaudible] feasible the report concluded that under state of san francisco law. will not know [inaudible] under optimistic assumptions.

there are also indications of potential violations of state laws including housing ash counsel ablts and housing crisis act. i urge to you redirect energy to show compliance with the state laws. >> thank you. >> next caller, please. hi this is adam the 6 residents in san frr fran for years and one thing consistent is how many of my friends people i know have been pushed out or left the city due to lack of housing. i think with what the previous

caller mentioned the hc d review the electric of housing element, san francisco needs to get serious about building more housing. i think this is the key thing we have to ask what is each peeves legislation going to dom encourage building of housing? or is it gog say -- we made an attempt but nobody will do this. it is -- kinds of like saying -- hey. you know you can sell a car but only cell 10 thousand dollars under the cost building it. you know in reasonable person will do that without gentleman subsidies. because people need to make a living, live nothing san francisco is expensive we know this. you know we have to look at practicalities. supervisor preston this year said that speculators were not

interested in single family homes when he exempted them from the vacancy tax. i disagree with that but they are river. they have money if they can't by an empty single family home, they will buy a multifamily home that has people. because they have the money and time. really -- we need to stop with the nitty grit and he tiengy kick around the edges. let's look at the 73 as a whole how do we get more home and affordable homeless in the city for people of otherwise. thank you. last caller, police. >> good afternoon, this is tray north beach committee we in

north beach experienced displacement and ls evictions i in 21 other nature it is on my street gone through that. and yes the building has sold and charging rents that are 6 to 8 times the amount that most of us had been pay nothing 2014. speculation is a real issue. we also are able to able to identify several in north beach. i would hope that we do look at more closely what is speculation. and there does need to be a look back there has to be. for us to builted what is needed for the people the existing tenant in this city. existing

home ordinance i would hate for anything to harm so many people i know in the bay view who are seniors and home ordinance. that they are protected. deterg speculation has to be a big part of this. thank you and keep up the great discussions i appreciate that. thank you. we have one more call they're popped up. let's take this last caller. i think the board should rethink the goals. you want top prevent making a house with adu if you prevent them from building 3 and 4 units when than i build the husband their mack is a house with an

adu when planning asked why did you not mixture myself with 4 units the developer can say this is the max density buzz you called mow a speck later. or -- is the goal to prevenn sham units or allow more units. make it more affordable or prevent the developer from making a profit? in my opinion you should relax [inaudible] and stream line the planning press so more housing built with a goal of increasing housing production with our housing develop. so that the rent will go down in san francisco. thank you. thank you and it looks like that was the last caller in the

queue. madam chair yoochlt thank you. with this public comment is closed. okay. so -- would you like me to split the files first, supervisor machine man? and then amend ownership mendz and split it? i think supervisor preston. >> i can run through my requests of the committee and make it easy for people >> that would be helpful. supervisor preston. thank you. i just wanted to pose the question as we get in the amendments here and get a sense from clothes. i'm concerned with tripping out i understand the position of mayor's office 5 years nonstarter and we had i think -- start of a discussion around what other purposes the look

back. uncomfortable the amendments would stip outlook back provision. you are saying? back to the file. if you will remember. this is the stuff you want. . the first time we split the file before you introduced yours a few weeks we are back to that file. as i remember. >> we are going back to that dpiel now add-on what you know we think will >> we are adding things back on. i guess what i want to suggest is or get the clothe's take on whether we should be adding in

what is what was section 2p on page 6 at the time. that says would not be in what is proposed. that says. this board recognizes additional development opportunity may lead to speck welltive real estate victims that may seek to maximize profits displacing current residents demoing existing housing stock, building new unit and quickly selling to to discourage that demolition of existing units and disaccomplice am. residents this ordinance makes the benefit of the density exception to persons when owned their propertieses for 5 years prior of date to application to obtain the exception including the ownership duration. while we may want to discuss00 autonumber of year its does not make sense we would not -- for

what come out of committee today does not include that sentiment as well as a look back period and understands everunderstanding that period of the number of years is subject of discussion. will i'm hope for other years i don't see -- why i'm not sense thering is disagreement that sentiment should still be why not include it. either with the 5 years or a different number but and have what come oust committee still have similar language. it is committee can do what they want this is a simple ma'am. i'm not proposing it today i

then and there 5 is a nonstarter if we put the 5 in but then we are just going down the path we have been down results in a mayoral detail we cannot over ride. i didn't feel had needed that provision why i'm not the strongest person to argue for including the ma'am if the committee wanted to include it and think about a number that is different from 5 then -- that is the will of the committee. the things i know i will state. would first be to add in the clean up language units to the density exception by city attorney and add in the at the full board before we voted on page 8 line one after shall enter in an agreement with the city rbi certing the language subjects new units to the subing

think jection. the second would be to add the reporting >> reporter:s for density program by supervisor mar everand adopted on page 9 line one adding a subjection h annium reporting. housing affordable and racial equity net final version that was adopted bite board and circumstantialerates to you this morning i ask you make those 2 ink chas the committee can make others if wants to and i have when you decided what amendments you want to make then i ask you to duplicate it and i can describe that the appropriate moment. i will -- move those amendments supervisor mandelman let me

explain that i am spent a lot of time and energy on supervisor mandelman's legislation. i -- was -- um -- i -- was okay to bring it back and had conversations with supervisor machine man as well as folks in the community. to try to have a path forward i want to come out with policy that makes tense for my district and the city. what i don't want to do is to invite multiple piece of legislation and i don't want to have this be an opportunity for one being the mayor's office at this point. i really want to enengage in a fleesz is productive.

where i think we will ends up better off with a better use of space and more sustainable housing. that we currently have. there is during our discussions you know before the break, well are a lot of empty house miss my district where folks passed away and the heirs don't know hato do their tax base is so low there is no incentive it do anything. and the houses were built in i different era. they are not energy efficient they have tiny kitchens set off from the house. folks don't want to live this way. i do see i you useful path forour housing stock in a way that is different i don't want displace am.

i think we can get this right. i hear supervisor preston by adding that amendment it is like a declaration. politically since the mayor has said that this is what she does not like. we can add that language that we can all agree on in terms of not wanting to inviolet speculation all that i don't i'm not comfortable with adding the same language we added before. it was specific low named out in her and i don't want to go through this exercise and all this work to ends up with another veto or even worse not having the support of colleagues. supervisor preston. is the guiding prince spell we don't want to make an amendment that the mayor said she wants to veto but will not say has not

said look back is a veto the mayor's representative said a 5 year look back is a veto. i would propose we adopt the language i read that paragraph p change 5 years to 4 we have no idea and mayor begin us no guidance what the time line and we have on going conversations what the appropriate look back it. what i have not heard is as a policy matter the board or the mayor is automatically opposed to having this concept in the legislation. i think we should have it and discuss and negotiate. that will be my proposal as we take that subsection i read change the 5 year to 4 since we know 5 is not acceptable i think sends a message we are open to discuss but continues to have language in the ordinance

>> supervisor peskin. >> i think supervisor preston was going the way i thought would be productive to go and base that on the words of the mayor's liaison to the board who could have said this is the sticks point we rebejected he did not say that. i probed supervisor mandelman the beginning about his conversations with the ceo and represent and it is i did not hear that. i think to the extend real thought it was good policy and the extent this this body is clear showing that we want to find the right policy and political spot, that this sufficient i mean. i think we are clear, which is you guys said less than 54 is less and we are putting this

there as a number that can be negotiated. i think that if we put all 3 of these and not sending anything to the full board today that we can continue to have that conversation. for the reasons we had it originally and again based on data about what is the most effective number to achieve when we want to achieve. supervisor mandelman. i think that is reason. 4 seems cute but i'm happy to use that as the basis for the conversations i will have with the mayor's office in the next couple of weeks. this is what i propose. i will not be supporting that amendment. i said why. so perhaps we can i will move the 2 amendments you read in the record. then -- split the file and allow

supervisor preston to make that amendment, does that sound reasonable? >> chair melgar. >> i'm sorry. deputy city attorney, i wanted note that the city attorney's office appropriated the amendments that supervisor mandelman asked his committee to move. we have not appropriated the withins that preston described we might be able to the language is from the prior legislation. what i heard you read was the finding but not the operative language that firecall exists in other part of the legislation that would impose the look back. and so i want to make sure if and when you make that motion that we know what you would like to move and like to confirm we can approve. emi'm sorry. that already was approved as to

form. when supervisor preston spruced it a month ago. is it not the same thing? should be the same policy but put in an earlier version of the legislation i want to know what we thought how tell fit in and can approve it. i don't think tell be a problem we have not had a chance to look at it we can sign off on it. supervisor preston you lookllow the legislation and can identify the provisionil do the same i will put up the one vetod and identify it so we know what the motion will be exactly. happy to and i being just to i think it is page 7 lines 21-25

and the provision i read. i'm sure we can firm that up. why don't we take a vote madam clerk on the amendmented read by supervisor mandelman. on that motion to the original file supervisor peskin. >> aye >> supervisor preston j. aye >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have 3 aye's. >> okay that passes. supervisor mandelman. thank you. madam chair the next thing while the city attorney and supervisor preston work on that amendment they would ask is -- split file in 2 resulting in one ordinance

include the zoning map to rezone rh within to 2 districts and up zone all rh wroshgs d to 2 d districts and another file leave rh1 how it is now and add the density exception program to go up to 4 units or successes on corn or. >> make is so. the following requested to be duplicated. and you will have 2 versions one with a density exception and the other as stated on the record. >> all right. >> yes. >> so -- okay. thank you. we don't need to vote on that. let's do this. since we have a couple other things on the agenda. perhaps we can move on to the next item and give madam deputy city attorney some time?

>> >> i have in contact with the drafting attorney understands the intent and can make it help take the look back line in the finding and the operative provision from the legislation using 4 years instead of 5. >> exactly. >> we are good to go? >> okay. >> we are >> supervisor preston. >> go ahead. >>. so, after that duplication we did you did you ma damp chair affected there are then amendments to striking to get rid of the stuff in the 2 fights. i skw we amend in file or you all amend this file strike out zoning map changes to result with a file that leaves rh1 and creates the density bonus program and after you have done that in the duplicated file

amend that to strike out related the density for 4 and sick leaving a zoning map change to rh2 and 2d. i see deputy city attorney nodding she's got temperature we prepared the amendment. thank you. >> thanks issue everybody. and so. i make that motion. >> okay. >> so that's to the original? as well? again or the duplicate file. >> amended >> i believe one amendment suspect to the original and the other to the duplicate >> okay. on the motion as stated for the duplicate supervisor peskin. >> aye >> supervisor preston >> aye >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have 3 aye's.

>> thank you. supervisor preston. i wanted move the amendments as described and to voteos look back reducing from 5 to 4 years. and that's to the clarity that is to the file one foil that has the zoning forplex and 6 plex program. joy believe the original that still has this in it. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> on that motion we are taking the amendment as stated by supervisor preston to the original file. supervisor peskin. >> aye >> >> entires preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> no. you have 2 aye's and one no with melgar in decent.

>> thank you. >> thank you. we will have conversations and come become and visit. >> great. we have to do something here. i think that we need to continue this to a date certain that way we don't have to renotice it. i will make a motion that we continue this for a month. yea. october 17th. >> i think depending how the conversation about carving out guess. this we need a month. that mean. if this is a matter of figuring out what the right look back is, we don't need a month. what i would ask is continue it to a date closer than that. and we may ask you to continue it to continue the this point. >> we are missing a couple of dates between now and then.

i would push become a bit to continue it to october 10th. >> yes. >> there you go. no audio. >> the third or 17th. no audio. i would rather have it on the third if we are dem in a conversation about a carve out. >> go ahead and -- no we can't then we have to renotice it this is a lot of w for madam clerk. do it on the third if you need more time on the third we can continue it to another date certain. >> thank you. through the chair, i was in discussion with deputy city attorney pierson looks like we have missed a vote for the original. >> so i think it would be good to clarify. i remember this is condition

fusing i know an ma'am was taken to version before you. that version was duplicated. i heard a vote taken on the amendments to the duplicate but i did not hear amendments to the original. and there were remember each version has to be amended one to remove the rezoning and one to remove the features. just out of caution and i see others nod thanksgiving they also did not hear that motorbike good to rewinds a bit to ensure that vote is taken. >> so. just to i'm sorry reiterate it is confusing you want us to add the no, ma'ams on the rent control. no that was done. >> and the item was duplicated. >> we had the 2 versions and supervisor mandelman described 2 amendments one the original and

one not duplicate. the amendment to the to will original remove anything that would have changed the zoning. and the amendments to duplicate remove everything else. i don't think this committee took votes on both of those things. >> i see. we should. i recommend. of another dubicate to the original again? no. there are file 212866 amendd and duplicated now 866 and the duplicate. motions as i understands them to amend 866 to remove any of changes to the zoning. to rh2 that is one motion. there is a motion to the dupe

areicate that is not yet numbered to dot inverse leave the zoning and remove everything else and after those motions are voted on we can return to priors preston's motion to the original. >> okay. take both for original and the dupe 8 or separate low. at the same time. on that motion supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >>ure have 3 aye avenue and on the motion by supervisor precinct addition to the paragraph on record supervisor peskin. >> aye >> supervisor preston. why aye. >> priors melgar. >> no. >> you have 2 aye avenue and one

no with melgar in decent. >> thank you. >> thank you. i'm sorry the motion to continue. >> motion to condition to october third. and at the original and duplicate as amended. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. why aye. >> you have 3 aye's. >> that motion passes. thank you. >> bye, thank you. okay. where are we, we are at item 6. 6, 7 and 8 together. why let's call that. why item 6 manying general plan the transit center plan to pasillity development of

transbay block 4 by revising height limits and bicycle policy and appropriate finings. 7, an ordinance amending zoning map of the planning code development of the trans bay block 4 redevelopment project. located on the south side of howard between beal and main street increasing height limits and appropriate findings. item 8 is resolution arc proofing the disposition of lands in ground lease of air space rights by successor agency to the redevelopment agency of san francisco to footwork 4 transbay partners llc for a purchase of 6 million for the property locateded at 200 main street and making promote findings. members who would like to speak on these items call 415-655-0001 then access code: 2495 796 7354 ## press star 3 to enter the queue.

>> thank you very much. colleagues my office received communication from elizabeth at ocii at 1. . upon 37 requesting a continuance of a week for this item because of some technical issues regarding the 90 day rule. i guess we have someone here to explain this. why don't. welcome. >> thank you. on behalf of planning i believe that continuance is you in to 2 weeks. to october 3. just after consultation with folks involved. apparently there is an issue that they arementing to work through with the developer. and at the same time the general plan amendment before you has a 90 day period in which you node to review. we want to make sure that 90 day does not come up by the time it is taken to kinds of deal with the other issues. and so we want to working with

the ocii staff and city attorney and counsel to come up with a strategy how to deal with the 9 day limit. therefore we planning and staff are recommending the 2 weeks we come become to you with some way to address this. why okay. okay. supervisor peskin. >> when the easiest procedural thing to do is to with draw items 6 and then 90 day clock will stop and reintroduce it? >> deputy city attorney that is certainly one of the options we are looking at but want to be careful to make sure that action will not preclude them reintroducing on a time frip. that might be the option we bring you but want to electric careful low at it. why okay. since it is noticed we have to take public comment. >> yes, madam chair.

>> no is this weird you think when an agency goes to the rules committee they are ready for primetime. as it is funky when i mean what didn't you know on thursday that you discovered on friday? it should not be i mean -- wasting the committee's time. get it together. >> okay. >> thank you. go to public ment on this item y. thank you are there members had would like to peek on items 6-8. we will move to the public call in line. and it looks like we have zero callers in the queue. >> okay. public comment is closed. make a motion we continue these 3 items to the meeting on october third. >> madam chair. hold on priors supervisor peskin

who is here from ocii or the supervisor who's name is on this to say, i mean i want waste my time once and twice. so -- how about continuing to the call of the chair and then when she you are ready to go you can actually put it on the calendar? how is this for a novel idea there was a court request to move to october 24th they have bye-bye noticed the clerk's office requests a date certain. it is a pretty hefty noticing fee. also, >> when we wasted machiney putting this on the calendar approximate it a date certain it does in the have to be renoticed. we have elizabeth on the line here to erickson cyst from ocii and also justice for the record the 90 day response time has

been cathin the that october 24th date. >> great. thank you for clarifying that. did you have anything to add? >> no , i don't have anything to add employmented note we apologize for this delay. we received word from the developer that there are concerns regarding financing program this we think we can w out. we need an opportunity to do that so we hope to be back shortly again, apologize notoriety delay. >> thank you very much. madam clerk make a notion that we continue this to october third. >> item sick-8 on the motion to continue to october 24th. >> the date requested or october third? to this committee.

yes. no audio. >> i'm sorry. yes. why okay. >> wait a minute. the motion to continue for 2 week sns i think this motion has i understood it the request for 2 week continuance is this right >> correct we were missing a meeting the earliest is october third, right >> that is 2 weeks >> yes. >> okay. >> on that motion supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have 3 aye's >> that motion passes. thank you. police call item 9. item 9 is hearing to discuss san francisco municipal transportation agency report to develop a plan to promost pedestrian access for boarding public tranceit e eliminating ps and making necessary prushth improve ams.

and requesting mta to report. members when would like to speak you need to call 415-655-0001 then access code: 2495 796 7354 ## press star 3 to enter the queue. supervisor preston. >> thank you. chair megovern and as eager as i am to get to this we arranged with the right folks at mta to have this hearing on october 17th would love to be continued until that date. >> >> okay. is this a motion. >> it it is. >> thank you. >> we have to take public comment it is noticed that way >> go ahead and do that. are i there members that would like to peek in the chambers we will move to the line. we have 4 listeners with 2 in the queue. let's take the first caller, please.

>> great. daved pill pel. witting all afternoon and another continuance that is just what is happening today. the supposed mta response to the board resolution is in the on letterhead. has no author or date. so it is hard to get the context if they could resends it. with somebody's name, date and may be mta all right letter head not/khrer how many are in the served they are on routes not in service. in the clear how this effort related to other transit planning work. i'm sure they will say they are busy doing transit planning not sure they are up to but this is clear something that will take several years according to memo. and finally the entire document

titled the bus stop guidelines san franking municipal riway are not on the mta website i request this mta post this document on the website or in the alternative mail a copy to me and this therefore is a public record's ask to the mta if they don't post on the website i will have further comment when is this is conditioned i'm sure you will. >> thank you. >> next speaker. please. >> adam in d6. i don't understands why there needs to be hearingos this it should be common sense. bus stipulates should be painted

red zones throughout the city or not allowed park in front of bus stipulates you don't need condition sulants or wait for report and hearings. you have been someone needs to say, yea. you know. pedestrian access to bus system good. no private vehicles p in the bus stops this is in the rocket science should be the easy possible thing for this committee the board of supervisors to and mta to move forward. the fact that this is bogged down in process is an indication of you know example hahn is wrong with san francisco leadership. i would ask all members of the board why this is something that just can't be done. you know you know it the right thing to do. everyone who takes transit know its other steles do it. there is in good reason to allow private vehicles to obstruct public transit.

thank you j. thank you very much. >> and it looks like that was the left caller in the queue. >> thank you. with this public comment is closed. supervisor preston med a motion to continue this to october 17th. >> on that motion >> i'm sorry. >> okay. >> of thank you. on that motion supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have 3 aye's. >> motion passes. do we have more business? >> that completeings the business. >> we are now adjourned. >> thank you. clear clear

>> for us, we wish we had our queue

and we created spaces that are active. >> food and drinks. there is a lot for a lot of folks and community. for us, it started back in 1966 and it was a diner and where our ancestors gathered to connect. i think coffee and food is the very fabric of our community as well as we take care of each other. to have a pop-up in the tenderloin gives it so much meaning. >> we are always creating impactful meaning of the lives of the people, and once we create a space and focus on the most marginalized, you really include a space for everyone.

coffee is so cultural for many communities and we have coffee of maria inspired by my grandmother from mexico. i have many many memories of sharing coffee with her late at night. so we carry that into everything we do. currently we are on a journey that is going to open up the first brick and mortar in san francisco specifically in the tenderloin. we want to stay true to our ancestors in the tenderloin. so we are getting ready for that and getting ready for celebrating our anniversary. >> it has been well supported and well talked about in our community. that's why we are

pushing it so much because that's how we started. very active community members. they give back to the community. support trends and give back and give a safe space for all. >> we also want to let folks know that if they want to be in a safe space, we have a pay it forward program that allows 20% to get some funds for someone in need can come and get a cup of coffee, pastry and feel welcomed in our community. to be among our community, you are always welcome here. you don't have to buy anything or get anything, just be here and express yourself and be your authentic self and we will always take care of you.

♪♪re of you. >> san francisco! ♪♪ >> this is an exhibition across departments highlighting different artworks from our collection. gender is an important part of the dialogue. in many ways, this exhibition is contemporary. all of this artwork is from the 9th century and spans all the way to the 21st century. the exhibition is organized into

seven different groupings or themes such as activities, symbolism, transformation and others. it's not by culture or time period, but different affinities between the artwork. activities, for example, looks at the role of gender and how certain activities are placed as feminine or masculine. we have a print by uharo that looks at different activities that derisionly performed by men. it's looking at the theme of music. we have three women playing traditional japanese instruments that would otherwise be played by men at that time. we have pairings so that is looking within the context of gender in relationships. also with how people are questioning the whole idea of pairing in the first place.

we have three from three different cultures, tibet, china and japan. this is sell vanity stot relevar has been fluid in different time periods in cultures. sometimes being female in china but often male and evoking features associated with gender binaries and sometimes in between. it's a lovely way of tying all the themes together in this collection. gender and sexuality, speaking from my culture specifically, is something at that hasn't been recently widely discussed. this exhibition shows that it's gender and sexuality are actually have been considered

and complicated by dialogue through the work of artists and thinking specifically, a sculpture we have of the hindu deities because it's half pee male and half male. it turns into a different theme in a way and is a beautiful representation of how gender hasn't been seen as one thing or a binary. we see that it isn't a modest concept. in a way, i feel we have a lot of historical references and touch points throughout all the ages and in asian cultures. i believe san francisco has close to 40% asian. it's a huge representation here in the bay area. it's important that we awk abouk about this and open up the discussion around gender. what we've learned from organizing this exhibition at

the museum is that gender has been something that has come up in all of these cultures through all the time periods as something that is important and relevant. especially here in the san francisco bay area we feel that it's relevant to the conversations that people are having today. we hope that people can carry that outside of the museum into their daily lives. >> 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. welcome to the small business commission meeting on september 12, 20 twoochl the meet suggest called to order at 4:43 p.m. held in person in city all room 400 and broadcast live on sfgovtv and available to view online or listened by calling 415-554-0001 as authorized by 5493e and the february 2020 emergency proclamation it possible that some members of mall business commission may attend remote.

they will participate and vote by video. the small business commission thanks modia services and sfgovtv for televising the meeting viewed on sfgovtv 2 or live streamed. we welcome the public's participation during comment periods. there will be an opportunity for general public comment at the end of the meeting and an opportunity to comment on each discussion or action item on the agenda. for each item the commission will take opinion comment first from in person and then from people attending remote. member who else be calling in the number is 415-554-0001. access code: 2484 888 3081 ##. when connected you will be in listening mode. when your item come up dial, star 3 to be added to the line.

if you dial star 3 before public comment is called you will be added to the queue. when you are called for comment mute the device you are listening the meeting of when it your time to speak you will be prompted to. public comment is 3 minutes per speaker and an alarm will sound once the time is finished. speakers requested to state names. sfgovtv show the office of small business slide. >> today we will begin with a reminder that the small business commission is the official forum to voice opinions and concerns about policies that affect small business in san francisco. office of small business is the best place to get answers about doing business in san francisco during a local emergency. if you need assistance the small business matter you can finds us online or via phone and as always our serviceers fro of charge. before an item is call i want to thank got goff for helping to

run the meeting. roll call. >> commissioner carter is absent >> commissioner dickerson. >> front. >> commissioner herbert. >> community everpresent german commissioner huie. >> here. >> commissioner cartagena. >> here and we have a quorum. >> the san francisco small business commission and office of mall business staff acknowledges we are on then cest ral home land of the recommend ram the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula as stursd of the land the ramaytush ohlone never lost nor forgot responsibilities as caretakers of the place and all people who is reside in the traditional territory. we recognize we benefit from living, working on their home

land we wish to pay respects acknowledging the ancestors of the ramaytush ohlone community and by affirming their rights as first peoples. >> call item 2. >> approval of the legacy business registry applications. a discussion and action item. the commission will discuss and possible low take action to approve applications. presenting today we have richard kurylo with office of small business. >> welcome, richard. >> good afternoon. commissioners. staff and public. i'm richard kurylo program manager. i like to acknowledge michelle reasono who is helped with markets and communications for the office of small business. michelle was instrumental in reruing and process the legacy business registry applications before you today. >> sfgovtv i have a power point.

before you are 5 applications for the legacy business registry includes a staff report. draft resolution, application itself and a case report and resolution from planning. application submitted to planning on july 20 and heard by the historic preservation commission on august 17th. 2a is out post studios the business is inspect post production and recording studio in the embark defero opened in october of 96. out post studios provides affordable recording services for music, pod cast, tv and film. the only fully stage in san francisco the reproduction of every day sound affects are added to films, video and other

modia production. jot business is known is founders advanced audio technology working with larger well known videoed technology companies to refine new audio tools. >> although the accident is in the 30 years old is eligible for listing listing because it prit in the san front for more than 20 years. corrected history and identity of the city and if not included would face risk of displace am. out post lost lease in april of 2022 and moved around the block. the core feature tradition to remain on the business registry is recording studio. item 2b is piedmont boutique the business is a clothing store selling women and pen's clothing accessories and cost unanimous. opened in october of 1972.

piedmont boutique carries shirts, pants, skirts. jackets, jewelry, wigs, hats and costumes for any occasion attracting a diverse group of patrons from san francisco the bay area and beyond. its clothing and accessory are made up of products that are manufactured in the united states. and that are designed by the business itself. piedmont boutique has been the chosen out fitter of the gay men's chorus. san francisco opera, sisters of perpetual and the court of san francisco to name a few. >> a feature of the store front are the legs wearing fish nets and red high heels from a second story window above the store front installed in 1995. core tradition the business must

maintain is clothing store. >> item 2c is po plus. the business is a retail, shipping mail box rental and business services store opened in 1982. where custody yers subelement home offices noterize documents and buy gifts. >> one of the oldest lbgtq owned and operated businesses in the castro, they not only provide neighborhood services but crashes to the 7s community and belonging in the area. known as the gay post office, po plus received mail for 2,000 private mailbox customers. as work from home has been common, customers turned to their computers, fax minutes, scanners to conduct business. in years po plus expanded the

gift offerings and card selections to compament the mail and shipping services. po plus is an essential member of the castro and supporter of numerous communities serving organizations the feature tradition the business must maintain is postal store. item 2d is pop's bar. a local neighborhood bar in the mission found in the 1937. . sells crafted mixed drinks, liquors, beers and other merchandise. pop's bar served communities who lived around this area which includes under ground bar in the 30s. irish post world war bar in the 1940s and 50s. to the latino community in the present. the business has adapted to the community. pop's bar opens 6 a.m. to provide space people working grave yard jobs to decompress after a long shift.

bar hosted weddings, memoryiam services and other themed nights. additionally, pop's bar connects with local artists to create their online clothing store. during the pandemic had artisan designers design and create their out door seating area. the core featured tradition the business must maintain is, bar. item 2e is st. john cold train church the organization is regulars community and jazz organization found in the 1977 roots back to the in bay view hunter's point. john coltrain is patron saint of the church a hub of spiritual life crocker jazz history and advocate for justice. organization holds weekly meditation services on consciousness hosts a radio

program and producesanual concerts celebrating his birthday and ascension. the organization is committed to not only celebrating the revvingacy of john and jazz music in san francisco but supporting the local ecosystem of bay area musicians so jazz can thrive here. church is transitioning from fillmore to a new space in fortmason the feature the business must maintain is faith based organization. all 5 businesses met the criteria required for listing on the registry and all received positive recommendation from the historic preservation commission. legacy business staff recommends adding them and drafted 5 resolutions for your consideration. a motion in support of the businesses should be framed a motion in favor of resolutions.

>> thank you. this concludes our presentation and happy to answer questions and there are business representatives in the room who would like to speak on behalf of the applications during comment and possibly some online as well. thank you. commissioners do we have comments or questions we can make comments after. >> yes. >> okay. people hit button its is not popping up. commissioner huie. >> got it. okay. >> good enough. is there public comment? go ahead. come on up >> commenters can come to the front. i am dave nelson owner of out post studios thank you very much. it is an honor and we know live

nothing san francisco is a lot of hard work and i really never expected or asked to be recognized for it but it is emotional i have to stay feel honored. also, i feel amazing that i'm with a church of john coltrain i was a guitar player and heard him play saxophone and i never played guitar again and switched to saxophone there is something about the moment that is not lost on me. so, thank you very much and i love being in san francisco and i think we are newscast best place on earth now. thank you. >> commissioners i'm michael cruise and i'm one of the partners pop's bar and call >> thank you. i'm one of a long line of

custodians for the bar it has been there since 1937. we are doing this for the next custodians down the line. any business whatever you are in that has been around for 85 years deserves another 85 to thrive and integrate in the community, which we tried to do. thank you this is something we need and appreciate and be proud of, thank you. we have one public commenter on the line. >> great. >> please, proceed. commenter, please, proceed. okay. commissioners do we have

commissioners do we have comment. commissioner cartagena. >> thank you president, congratulations to everyone here. thank you for coming out. pop's and the neighborhood bar born and raised. i actually you triggered a memory during the 89 earthquake i was play nothing front of the pop's bar i remember rung and i remember after the earthquake, pop's was like giving refreshments out to passengers that wandered off from 2124th street bar. i have other memories i will not speak on in public comment but that's just what that business has been. friends were part of stewards in the. what i'm saying is it is awe some to see a san francisco business and to demonstrate what community is. big, fun, disasters that's what san francisco is about.

thank you. >> not seeing comments. i will say, as a former musician i'm thrilled to see any kinds of business that can survive 30 plus years focusing on music and certainly recording studios these days and it is a very tough business to stay arc float in and sounds like you had challenges with rent and -- being able to sustain yourself. i'm happy to hear that you have been able to continue. and -- find a way to persevere and that is fantastic. and also speaking as a musician, john coltrain church is

absolutely legendary. you know we used to go there when too many years ago i don't want to talk about but -- back had it was on goth? was it? yea. yea. then it moveed divisidero. may be i'm getting the order mixed up but. just an incredible institution. so great to see that you guys are doing what you do. i love it so much. thank you. >> commissioners do we have a motion? motion. i move to approve all of them. >> i second it. motioned by commissioner cartagena i will read the roll. commissioner carter, commissioner dickerson. >> yes. >> commissioner herbert. >> yes. >> commissioner huie. >> yes. >> if the laguana.

>> yes. >> commissioner cartagena. yes. motion passes. congratulations. >> thank you. [applause] next item. item 3 first year free program update a discussion item. commission will hear an update on the first year free program from office of treasurer and tax collector we have arc upon amanda freed and hafiza salehbhai with office of tax collector. you have the floor. >> thank you. >> i will put up your slide.

good afternoon am everyone i helped manage the free program at the tarrant counties collector's office. >> we are excited share first year free data proposed changes to legislation and the next steps we move in the next phase of first year free. we are grateful for your partnership to make this seamless. the information breaks down the number of permits and fees

waived by department. and july 31st we had a total of 1, 173 first year free enrollments. waived over 377 thousand dollars in fees for over 1100 different types of permit and fees issued by various departments. 30% were businesses in the food industry. enrollment process will remain the same. we are making easy as possible. no extra paperwork or program this is they need to fill out. business opts in. after rej strering business or adding a new location they will get an e mail or letter explaining that they are part of the first year free program of

for new businesses they will enroll through the new business process and business existing businesses enroll through account update when they add a new location. troubleshoot issues experiencing. over all received positive feedback appreciating the program and small businesses. there were many businesses who qualified but did not get costs waved. this happened because the criteria was too limiting. we are very excited share that supervisor ronnin is sponsoring the legislative changes and expect it to be introduced

tomorrow. here other changes we proposed to the board. >> we have proposed amending the program waiving permits, license and business registration retroactive to december 21, 21 to extend the program through june 30 of 23. and increase the maximum gross receipts to questions of law foil for the tax and fee waiver to 5 million instead of 2 million. >> we know there has been confusion the definition of ground floor. like food trucks. we have proposed a change of definition of grounds floor extend to all commercial use locations. this would include food trucks, basements. farm are markets and more. >> here is the table to show projectedents reals and businesses based on gross receipts. we projected additional 1, 627 eligible businesses for first

year through june 30 of 23 if we just extended the time frame and did not change the gross receipt threshold or commends to all commercial locations if we increased the gross receipts to qualify 2 million to 5 million dollars and include those who started november first of 21 through june 30 of 22, the projected over 9 huh eligible businesses. >> question is, how will the proposed changes impact departments. well, for the most part verifies first year free applicants should remain the same of businesses will bring letter or e millennium to permitting agencies like dbi or d ph and say they were enrolled get fees waived on the spot. alternateively they can share business ash count number with staffs standpoint can look them

up. the staff do not need to rely on letter or e mail. because of changeers retroactive november 1 of 21 this will require manual work from staff. departments will also see an increase in refunds requests for businesses that will qualify under the proposed changes. most low for those that have gross receipts 2 to 5 million dollars and those that were not on ground floor. to rule out changes we mroon seth up meetings with departments to do refresh training and update on legislative changes. we will automate the process by identifying businesses that may be eligible based on gross receipts and reaching out to them. we will also update our website, share content and create flyers to let businesses no. >> want to make sure all small

businesses owners and a [inaudible] no other proposed changes and need your help to spread the word. >> we will have out reach materials available for to you distribute. the flyers and social modia content available by neighborhood to make it [inaudible] for different parts of the city. if you don't see your neighborhood or think we are missing, let us know. you can refer people to our website or have them call 311 for more information. >> thank you for your time rely on groups like the small business commission to provide feedback over how the program is work we are grateful for your help reach out and we are happy to take questions. >> next. >> commissioners. >> thank you over all the

program on the ground in the mission district huge success it has been easy in san francisco you know -- we make things difficult and this is not a great program. hi a technical question business asks me. so, say i have a band number and open an additional location. and say they do a build out with dbi, do they get the fee for that new location or not? does that qualify? if they are adding a new location? completely a new like number. >> and if they qualify and meet the criteria they should be able to. >> cool. >> thank you. i love this program and delighteded to work with supervisor ronnin. i guess my understanding is idea came out of conversations with the small business commission.

i'm biassed toward is a good program temperature is a good program. a great program. hai recall from the original presentations is that we were expecting the out liin year one. i think 5 million the original. ownership the number i will say in our upon report to the board we were surprised how little was spent under this program. part of that was there was not good information when we were creating this program that was what we worked together on was why is it hard to figure out how much small businesses are paying to open up a business. and we have seen a lot of insight and partners closely with the office of small business and permit center to understand are there businesses that should be qualifying that are not or are qualified but not getings costings waived. that is happening we are

troubleshooting along the way. but i guess the over all new system good if businesses are spending less than we thought on the costs and we are looking for other ways to provide relief yoochl it was meant as a critique. first, it is awe some we helped 1, 173 businesses. that is amazing. every one of the businesses are local economy needs and people need those jobs temperature is arc mazing that we saved the businesses hundreds of thousands of dollars. that is not an insignificant number. i'm pleased to see that the threshold is increase friday 2 to 3. and i'm 5. >> 5. i think the first slide said 3 but -- no it is going up to 5 million retroactively. i saw the 5 later. great. i love it is going up to 5 and

love all businesses are included. hopefully -- enable us to use a bit more of that money that has been put aside in the budget for facilitating small business growth. i was happy to see the out reach that is happening presumable low in multilanguage support. >> yea. >> okay. if there is anything we can do to help with that out reach and make sure the word gets out i know we will be in00 autobeginning stages of promoting a survey we are doing that communications around the survey can also talk about guide people to the amazing program encouraging people to start and open more businesses. looks like everything is working

like we hope it would pan out. good news we have more to do more for more businesses. we can expand on that going fared that is exciting. >> thank you. >> all right. thank you for coming in and giving the presentation to us. >> is there public comment on item 3 in there are no public commenters. it is closed. >> next item. >> item 4, board of supervisor's file 220 upon 877 administrative code. this is repeeve legacy business registry fees a discussion and action item. commission will discuss and may take action amending the administrative code to remove the >> reporter: to charge a legacy business registration fee.

>> okay. >> director tanning are you presenting this? >> and our staff returned but happy to share that when we were lookingal ways we could support small believeses andmented to start in house. one thing that we noticed is this businesses have to pay a 50 dollar fee to apply to be on the legacy business registry. so this think was included in the original ballot measure that voters passed. we learned that we were able to make this sxharj delete the spee fee through an ordinance at the board of supervisors. . today at the board of supervisor's rule's committee they pass today out unanimously to the full board. so i know it is out of order but given timing we were happy to see that and want to urge your support of this fee removal. >> thank you to staff who worked on this. >> great. >> commissioners, comments?

i -- move to support the administrative code repeal of the fee. >> i second that. >> motion by president laguana and seconded by herbert >> commissioner dickerson. >> yes. >> commissioner herbert. >> yes. >> commissioner huie. >> yes. >> president laguana. >> yes. >> commissioner cartagena. out. >> motion passes. >> great. >> next item. >> item 5 adoption of parental leave policy to commission rules of order a discussion and action item the discussion will discuss and possibly act to article 2 section 6 to include a parental leave policy.

you can find the language thatture adding in the by laws. >> you want to walk us through this came from the city attorney's office advising we include this language that allows members of the commission to take a parental leave of absence and have that not count toward their attendance. >> great. not very controversial. commissioners are there comments or questions? public comment? >> there is none. okay. commissioners do we have a motion? we have a question. a quick clarifying question. if somebody were to take a parental leave, does that like when it come to quorum and other things like the number of members count how does this

work? they would i believe they would be absent and the commission would make quorum without them. >> thank you. >> commissioners do we have a motion? i make a motion to adopt the proposed language for article 2 section 6 in the by laws. >> i second it. motion by commissioner huie seconded by commissioner [inaudible]. sorry i could not missed who seconded. >> laguana. gi will read commissioner carter abcents. commissioner dickerson. >> yes. >> commissioner herbert. >> yes. >> commissioner huie. >> yes. >> president laguana. >> yes. >> commissioner cartagena. >> yes. motion passes. >> great. next item. >> item 6 approval of draft

meeting minutes a discussion and action item the commission will discuss and possibly take action to approve the august 22nd, 22 commission meeting minutes. >> commissioners, i just want to note that staff informed me the draft included in this agenda is incomplete. so i will make a motion to continue it to next meeting. commissioner comments or questions? >> okay. >> public comment? welcome, sir. >> can you set the timer to 3 minutes. >> yes. >> sorry. hold on. >> terrific. hi. i'm michael patrellis. and i'm here to strategyly object to the draft minutes they don't reflect reality.

for public comment, there is just a list of names. there is absolutely nothing there about what we said. the content of our speech has been erased. that is unacceptable. as -- you know, there were many of us here to peek about the resolution regarding another planet. and their plans to ator the integrity of the castro theatre. i'm holding a sign that says safety seats. refers to the orchestra seats in this beautiful theater that another planet wants to rip out so they can flatten the orchestra level and destroy the integrity. this beautiful movie palace. we are going to do all we can to

save the seats. i have here a -- 150 word statement that you are required by law to include in the minutes i will upon hand it to the secretary when i'm through speaking. in this statement i'm addressing how the president of this commission greatly disrespected the members of the castro community waiting until the last minute to put a bog us resolution before you. the comments -- that you are looking at mentioned many you have don't know why that resolution was here again. showing how poorly the leadership was from the commissioner. that is unacceptable. we in the castro community for decades dealt with trauma from a political arc sassination of harvey milk. to aids wiping us out and epidemic of evictions.

in january another planet come in as an interloamer with no connections to the community and says they are our saviors. when it took them 7 months to hold the town hall meeting they didn't tell us they were in cahoots with sharkey laguana but e mails show he had been in communication with another planet at the time of their town hall meeting. shaeshg laguana owes united states an apology for creating more divisions and trauma in the castro community by what he did and how he put it on your agenda and now you have omitted when we said. unacceptable. >> thank you for your comments. is there public comment online? there is none >> public comment is closed. >> commissioners i'm making a

motion to continue the minutes until they can be updated. >> i second. >> motion by president laguana and seconded by commissioner herbert. commissioner dickerson. >> yes. >> commissioner herbert. >> yes. >> commissioner huie. >> yes. >> president laguana. >> yes. >> commissioner cartagena. >> yes. >> motion passes. >> great. thank you. >> next item. >> general public comment a discussion item allowing members to comment on matters that are within the small business commission's jurisdiction but not on today's calendar and suggesting new items for the commission's future consideration. >> thank you. >> would you like to make your public comment. hello michael patrellis again. i'm again holding update sign that reads save the seats. it is the 3 word slogan that we

have adopted. to say will reject another planet's plan to rip out the seats in the orchestra at the castro theater. now i believe that this commission has an interest in helping small businesses. and i'm here to tell you how to do it. put a resolution before yourself calling on greg perlof the ceo of ap e to hold monthly town halls at his theater. you want to bring the community together? it starts with changing another planet. it took them 7 montes to hold their first town hall. and at the ends of that town hall hi asked, when is your next town hall? there was silence.

that is in the how you build confident in the castro to which readically alter that theatre. please, put a resolution before yourself saying greg perlof needs to meet monthly in his theater in a town hall meeting open to all. that would be a start. right now, they are not communicating transparently. it is harming the collective psyche of our community. it is also harming the small businesses today! by the trauma we are going through. now, um -- i want to address plan b. let's say ap e, gets all the permits. they will change the um --

orchestra. and two-year period ensues in the castro. a mess of 2 years on the castro while all the renovations are taking place and then greg is holding his events. when if no one come? what if there is no trickle down economic benefit as we see at the golden gate theatre and the war field. greg said if he gets his way he will have 120 nights of shows at the castro tloert theater what about the other nights when the theater will be closed that is plan b we are looking at and unacceptable. i am here to say to you and everyone watching, save the seats of the castro theater. thank you. >> thank you for you're comment. is there other public comment?

there is none. >> thank you. >> next item. >> director's report this is a discussion item. >> all right. good evening commissioners. so company updates for you on the economic recovery front. just to keep you posted a couple of things at state level there was an effort to extend alcohol sales in san francisco until 4 o'clock on saturday, sunday and holidays and until 3 a.m. for some of the other days. unfortunately that state bill that was sponsored by senator wiener did in the make it through the state legislator. i'm sure there will be other efforts to try to help with economic recovery in general. the other update that is related to liquor licenses, society abc has announced an upcoming or application window for type 87

liquor license in san francisco. and as a reminder they are full restaurant liquor licenses for businesses in our outer neighborhood corridors. and while type 47 license are only available in the secondary market in the city now. type 87 licenses are available directly from abc. i guess the prices around 16 thousand dollars. just a note that the licenses for the bay view and tervalstreets have already been claimed. so the new licensing will not be available in the corridors. they are the type 87s are available in excelsior, visitation and ocean avenue. the application windso is from september 19-september 30. alternate application fee is high, unsuccessful applicants have the fees refunded minus 100

service charge employment to make sure everybody is aware. the application windso from assessment 19-the 30th. >> the other update is shared spaces to make sure everyone understandses what will be happening in the next couple of weeks. there have been changes especially since the last presentation that this commission received when we understand is that the mta will e mail a notice to all shared spaces operators explaining their individual assess ams for each shared space and followed by compliance advisory, which you know of as a single bill of health. and supposed to be in box e mail by october first. there will be 2 things they all go together. and the mt annoy explains in detail what is compliance

advisory. as a remindser. applications for the permanent shared space are due november first. but you do need to submit as part of naapplication -- drawings that don't have to be done by an architect they can be hand drawn. that explains how the new shared space will comply on a permanent bases with the design guidelines and financial assistance is available through equity grants from planning. applications are currently up on the website. and an updated manual will be available soon. so that will contain drawings and check lists to help businesses appropriate for various applications. this is on shared spaces and -- i'm sure that we will hear more on that soon. >> and lastlimented share on you know behalf oawd there is

interest in economic core activation and economic recovery in san francisco. they issued a request for proposal. for activity such as pop up events or other activities that will generate interests. that was 6 million dollars include part of the budget. and that process is under way award letters should go out soon and our office is gearing up to assist with as much as the economic core activation as we can. as well as in other neighborhoods. those other update says from the meeting, thank you. >> thank you. any commissioner comments or questions? public comment? there is none >> public comment is closed. >> item 9 commissioner discussion and new business. this is a discussion item. >> any commissioner new business?

commissioner huie. i wanted give an update on the survey. it went out it was -- like last week. last week and we have gotten a few respondents.

>> great >> we have as of this morning we had 20 sick sponses. that is a lot. i mean given that i can give the numbers for the toll sponses last time. especially when we consider i have not tweeted it yet. >> [laughter] that will blow this survey up. [laughter] hopefully. get ready for 3 more. >> [laughter]. >> last time we had 579. we are pretty good now. >> on our way. >> uh-huh. >> and i think an opportunity that we have now will a couple of opportunity is i think for all of us to hopefully be able to upon send it out to our networks. that was successful last time. and gives us an opportunity to reach out to people that we have not spoken to our been in touch with reasonable. and just to remind them we are here and want to hear how they are doing. and also be able to perhaps schedule time to talk further. >> i think that was a real opportunity for us last time was to reach out to we wanted talk to and had not had the time. >> that's one opportunity as i think harry had sent an e mail already. i can sends one tomorrow so you can forward to people if that is helpful. >> great. >> the other second opportunity is i looked at numbers for last time and we made great efforts both in the original survey and accommodate for different languages. and so last time, the there were 27 that were -- that were responded in spanish. 3 in chinese.

two in korean, one in vietnamese and one in japanese. i think that is an opportunity for us to really consider how do we gauge like the need as well as how do we meet those needs. and you know we can use those types of channels and you know the understanding from it. for future communications as well from our office. so -- i think kerry suggested perhaps pulling out the intro in the language. and using that as an e mail as we you know e mail it out to the communities that we might be personally connected to. which i understand like not all the -- are connected to every, you know. communities so00 eye think knowing who might appreciate it and -- just the intro at least completely in spanish or we can

also do that in my network in schein chinese and see if we can capture more voices. so -- i think those are irrelevant hopeful numbers i'm excited see the information we have. and i want to thank professor chaoedary again. for all of her time and help on this effort. she has been arc maze to work with and has a research assist uponant who has been on it as well. you know they delivered these over the summer. quite early in the fall now. i appreciate her help from san francisco state university. the second piece i have is also that autumn moon festival. saturday night was autumn moon i'm being a bad chinese-american now. questioning it. but you know the season

continues and so -- on the west side in the richmond will celebrate autumn moon on september no 17th. so -- i hope you know you will come out and check it out. this time we have a lot of artists and venders. i think from the local neighborhood as well as others that are like ap i identifying artists and venders. at the festival. so -- that is pret much all i got. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner dickerson. yes. i thought it would be good. to hear me, first. i thought it would be good for you all to know how our retreat went.

our annual retreat we have not done it for 3 years due to the pandemic. what make its a unique experience is 3 nights in nevada city as a conference center. and out of the 50 or the 62 that participated 38 were from bay view. and they were influencers. when i say that i'm talking about doctors and people on staff here. and many influencers that were able to intgreat with even some of the young people in oakdale that are serviced by city of dream who is partnered with you see fit to make surety young people were sponsored and paid for. at the retreat what made this unique and significant to -- the small a small believes in the bay view is is that we took time

to -- receive coach. we would have the sessions that were intense they were able to really let something g. that is underestimated in the bay view and african-american community is the affect of trauma. and the, the inability to deal with it in the masses. which is challenging. in this setting, there was so 19 were able to talk about it in a nonjudgmental atmosphere with people here to get the support. what made it unique they were influencers not just people who you know -- dot november they are people who are in the upon communities who have staff, who are leader, supervisors or business owners that participated at this retreat.

i feel honored just not even the people who attended butt ripple affect television when everything was done. we come home. and there were a number of shootings. one of the young ladies who came to our retreat got shot and we don't know where she is she is not conscious we are waiting to hear from what the doctor will say. the ripple affect of being able to really be hand's on with the people and help them deal with the trauma how they responded was the out reach i got e mails and texts people saying had they not been in that environment they don't know how they'll would have handled the impact of the deaths that took place over the past 2 weeks. there has been 8. i'm not sure you are aware. one of the families there was 4.

out of 1 family that lost a family member. and so my heart is burdened with being able to provide more life coaching health and wellness service for the bay view specifically to specifically address the trauma that goes unnoticed and minimized. and you 3 mitt is willing to it is not comfortable. it is hard and it is the skiendz of work that people don't jump to do. but i believe it is worth it and committed to creating that plan and program. is have 3 other company that is rights commit to the experienceship of this to be available through programs we are work on creating.

have to get people out of their space so they have fresh eyes. we were able to book for next year and we are already booked. that is good t. is a small part and the volume of people in san francisco but i believe it is fluential because it is necessary to bring heeling -- to those that they don'ts know where to go or what to do. it affects everybody on every level. so, i wanted to say you 3 fit retreat was a success. and i'm grateful for the partnerships we have now. and we have 62 at this event. we already have 80 pland that is already on the books.

we will do our best. to do that. and then just how people are finding so grateful for katie bringing acknowledgment to when we dwelt this weekend. had a shooting. and fortunate to be a safe space for families that had been affected bite murder and the victims of the families. so, of course, i'm in support of promoting small business my heart is burdened with the people who need somebody to be there and so -- i'm glad to be there on third and newcome in the heart of the bay view. thank you.

gentleman ahead. thank you for sharing that information it is important for torn hear. thank you. commissioner dickerson. i know you are proud to be there i >> this community is luck tow have you there. i know the work that you are doing and what you are doing to help facilitate the heeling from that trauma. it is critical and it is so important and so meaningful. you know, we know now through science that one of the most meaningful ways to address depression is through exercise. that it can be more effective than any medication.

the leadership you are showing here for community that is in crisis is just absolutely it is beautiful. and they are luck tow have you we are luck tow have you on this commission to and i'm grateful that you are telling us what is going of the truth is i didn't know. now i do. you know, public safety issues have hit a company us. and -- you know i think if we look at the next year going forward, that's probably opportunity that is right for us to look for ways we can play the same constructive role you are playing in your communities now. how can we help heel the city?

how can we help get people to a better place. may be make things a bit better. we can't pass laws or tell anybody what to do but this commission is good at giving good advice and good feedback. and i would like to encourage you to keep sharing that story. i feel honored hear it. and i would like to find a way for this commission help support you in that work. and help amplify that work across all the communes in the city. we all need it. thank you. is there any public comment. why well is none.

>> public comment is closed. >> next item. >> item 10 adjournment. >> sfgovtv show the office of small business slide. we will ends with reminder the small business commission is the official public forum to voice opinions and concerns about the policies that fact the vitality of small believes in san francisco and the office of small believes is the best place to get answers about doing business during the local emergency. if you need assistance with small business matters reach out to the office of small believes. meeting adjourned.

>> good morning, everybody. >> good morning. glad to see you her. welcome to her majesty and the mayor and the ministers joining us today and everybody joining us today. i'm alicia belligerent star and the president and ceo of spur which is an urban policy and urban planning nonprofit that focuses here on the bay area but we constantlily are looping at the netherlands for inspiration so i'm excited to be with you for an a hissing set of conversations. we're going to have panels tackling different topics and it's going to be fun and excited about it and to start our program i have the honor as introducing mayor london breed to give us