-unless it is better defined say that destruction of property could trigger . i mean, if a person is smashing a window which is not good, i don't know that it's okay to shoot them, but i'm not saying you would do that, i'm saying the way destruction of property is listed in here gives me pause. >> we (inaudible) rise to hostile crowds where barricades are being broken, vehicles broken and buses taken over, things lit on fire. talking large destruction of property. >> i think if we say that mass scale-we saw what happened in the nation capital with

barricades and destruction of property so i get it so maybe this requires language tweaking. then, the-i think this gets me pretty much maybe through it. the restocking at $10 million which happens to be the section 9.118 threshold where you have to come anyway, we need to discuss that. and then i think ab481 specifically does require and i put the language in and you guys took it out, that it has to identify an independent oversight body. i identify the board of supervisors which seemed to be for ab481 was pointing. i think it has to identify, i think that is clear in the law so don't think-we can have a different

oversight agency, but i think you can't strike that language is the way i read the law. not an attorney. >> we are talking restocking section? >> no, this is r28. >> i can- >> complaints and sanction. police commission is fold under to that in terms of compliance of member compliance. police commission is already folded into any discipline action along with the chief, so if we are talking about compliance with the government codes, 771d i believe, i think we already acknowledge the board of supervisors would be that governing body. >> okay, if you can show me where, maybe we are good. >> we added a section at the last page, page 20. >> page 20. >> essentially folded it into the annual

report. not the compliance section, which just says it is the board of supervisors within their purview to oversee compliance of that government code section. >> we can quival about this. i see section 6, i still don't think it has the magic words of who is is the ultimate oversight authority, but-we can also talk to council about whether i'm right or not in the reading of ab481. or i can just go ask david chu. amazing that david chu was able to get this passed in assembly but automated speed enforcement still can't be passed. this isn't a comment on the pd, this is

amount comment on the state legislator. i can't figure out the state legislature but what do i know i'm been a city council member for the last 20 years. that is--i reserve my right to bring up anything else wednesday but that is it at a high level and colleagues if you want to add, subtract, go for it. if not why don't we open this item number 5 up to public comment? and to members of the public, i will include in the file as we did previously the most recent grid that the pd supplied to members of this committee on friday so peepical look a-people can look at it in the intervening week. >> i did post that

earlier this morning into legistar. >> excellent. one last thing for me to give you. >> memberoffs the public who would like to speak and joining in person should line up to speak now a-for those listening remotely call 415-655-o001 enter id 248889877754 and pound and pound again. press star 3 to enter the speaker line. those in the queue continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted and that is your queue to begin comment. we have person-in the room for public comment. you have two minutes for public comment. >> hi. my name is author cocha member of the san francisco friends meeting serving on the peace and social concern committee. we have a quaker meeting house on south 9th street, 65 south 9th street.

so, i'm here to represent the meeting. asking the board to call for further amendment of the proposed military equipment policy. to fully define authorized use for all weapons, especially assault weapons. i object to assault weapons considered standard issue as well as machine guns. i think they should be in the inventory and think they should be accounted for. we need to align receipt of annual reports and budgets. require transparency and restocking. note blank checks up to $10 million. that is a lot of money not to keep track of. as quaker pacifist i don't think the sfpd should have so many weapons of war. we are a city of peace, not military. i think the proposed policy is morally and ethically wrong. this policy does want safeguard the public welfare

safety civil rights or civil liberties and ab481 requires governing bodies to only approve the use of the policy if it safeguard the public welfare safety civil rights and civil liberties. i visit a friend in visitation valley a couple yires ago, one of the poorest neighborhoods in san francisco and witness willinary star armored vehicle making a (inaudible) shocking and out of proportion like it was different realty then other neighborhoods in san francisco. i was more afraid of the police then the poverty and crime that surrounding me. briefing devices should not be deployed against a person and only used- >> your speaker time elapsed. >> can i make one last statement? >> please wrap up. >> military equipment is more frequently deployed in low income black and brown communities meaning

the risks impacts of police militarization are experienced most acutely in marginalized community. thank you for the opportunity. >> thank you fl for your comments. any additional members of the public for comment on item 5? >> no additional parties thin room we can move to call in phone number where we have 6 members in line. >> first speaker, please. >> can you hear me now? >> please proceed. >> great. david pillpel again. on this item, in yes victor did upload the department's submission this morning. that is great, but also in attachment 21 the committee packet should have today date and has last week. it is better for the police to have some of this equipment and not use it then to not

have it and need it in the event of some event that requires it. that's where i fall on the acquisition or holding the equipment. my understanding is that this doesn't change what the police has, it just makes the list of that equipment publicly transparent and extent govern its use in a way that did not exist before, so it is really more about transparency then additional pension militarization of the police. i hope the sheriff department policy pending before this committee and any other ab481 policy gets similar scrutiny to the police department's. thanks for listening. >> thank you. can we have our next caller? >> hi. this is jennifer (inaudible)

work for the american friend service committee. calling to urge this committee to include assault rifles in this policy. the public deserves to know the fiscal impact of sfpd15 machine guns, 64 submachine guns, 608 assault rifles (inaudible) use of assault rifles lead to deaths thin city including this year automatic fire weapons are indiscriminate. the public deserves to give input how such deadly weapons would be used and that is provided by ab481. i also urge this committee to consider setting the annual report receipts occur in the spring. the new law ab481 requires reporting on the total annual cost for each type of military equipment and that includes not just the acquisition cost but also personnel training maintenance and more. these are outlined. that means

that sfpd needs to be able to answer questions that account for personnel cost especially around training and maintenance. these questions include things like how many personnel devoted on training for each weapon? what was the cost of the personnel time? how many hours devoted towards cleaning rifles and guns? towards cleaning maintenance on every weapon that is described? were any of these questions done at overtime rate? by setting a due date for the annual report in the spring this will not only better align with the annual budget process for the city,b it will help sfpd to identify the changes it needs to take in the record keeping practices and work with a (inaudible) more able to fully deliver on the requirements. thank you. >> thank you. can we have our next caller,

please? >> hello? >> hi, please proceed. >> hi. my name is john lensy pollen with the american friends service and my comment is very brief. the proposal from sfpd to make a fully automatic machine gun and submachine guns a standard issue and therefore exempt from ab481 requirement for use policy and reporting on those weapons is totally unique in the state. there are many other departments and i should say american friends service committee has reviewed more then a hundred police department and sheriff policies for ab481 including their use of fire arms and whether they classify as assault weapons as fire arms. the vast

majority more then 90 percent of police department and sheriff offices include assault weapons semi-automatic rifles in the use policy for ab481. some even say we consider this standard issue, but we in interest of transparency will include this. there is one department where the legislative body governing body said you didn't include assault rifles, we want you to include it which is under ab481 part of the authority of the governing body to say okay, this does not include in ab481 by law but we want you to include it and san francisco has the ability to do that. on the issue of machine gun and submachine gun there are many departments that have such fire arms such weapons. none of them have classified as standard issue. every single

department i'm aware of that has those type of fire arms included them in the ab481 policy. it is atrocious that this department would attempt to classify these weapons as standard issue and exclude them- >> thank you your time elapsed. thank you very much. can we have our next caller, please? >> speaking for progressive labor party. hello everyone. let's cut to the chase. part -what are the police for? it isn't stop crime or protect us. (inaudible) the police kill us with impunity, bust down our doors, stop and search us, they break up our demonstrations, they spy on us, they are basically a hired killers to keep a tiny ruling class in power. now they want military weapons. why? well, millions are becoming homeless.

our kids don't have enough food, schools are chaos or prisons, can't get health care, cant afford food or gas and now preparing for a war with russia and china that will get our social services. the police want military weapons because the bosses are afraid of massive rebellion and they are right, we will rebel but we need it go beyond rebellion. we need a (inaudible) not have to fight the same battles over and over and over again. elections will not do it. we can do it. all of these fights today against militarizing the police against school closings, against evictions they can bring us together and teach us how to fight. let's keep our eye on the prize driving out the bosses with working class revolution. thank you. >> thank you. can we

have our next caller, please? >> good morning, this is regina (inaudible) women international league for peace and freedom. (inaudible) have already talked about issues i was going to raise, so i'm going to focus on a couple other things. one is i want to thank chair peskin for continuing this item. continuing to dialogue with the police department to get more specific information into this policy and the board is going to make policy decisions that are important to this ordinance. we need more definitions of the [audio cut out]

>> (inaudible) >> available to us early enough so we actually could review that and i fallowed very easily the comments made by chair peskin, because of that document. i will look forward to seeing the responses after wednesday's meeting with the police department. i would like you to ask the police department about two other items. one, is there $10 million figure. as you mentioned that is kind of standard so it really needs to be a smaller amount. i still think it is a great idea to have a earlier report along the budget cycle starting in beginning of the year up to march, so that we have early indication how this policy is playing out in terms of a annual report. so, those are basically the things-you have my

written comments for more detail. appreciate that you are taking the time to make sure that we get a policy that is the one that the city deserves as a city of peace and that i know we are past the deadline, but it is more important to get it right. thank you. >> thank you. >> can we have our next caller, please? >> hello, my name is paul riley, and i live in san francisco in district 10. i represent all of us (inaudible) i ask the board of supervisors to call for further amendment of the proposed military equipment use policy (inaudible) authorized use for all weapons especially assault weapons. these

weapons have historically been misused. i ask the board to examine the continuous sequence of policies which lead to the assault upon unknowing african american community. restrictive covenants make a heavy presence of police in the neighborhood to make sure people stayed within these boundaries and this goes all the way back to the killing of matthew johnson, a 15 year old unarmed boy in hunters point. i heard the supervisor mention destruction of property, (inaudible) was murdered. the mayor at the time john selly authorized state (inaudible) violence against the entire community using military equipment. i was not alive at the time but grew up in the neighborhood with tanks driving around, being used against the

community. i grew up in a neighborhood where ar15 were pointed at me telling me to go inside the house. i please ask the board to look at this matter because it will impact the entire community which i live in. thank you. >> thank you. can we have our next caller? >> yes. good morning. tracey (inaudible) from open privacy from the media alliance. good morning again and thanks for the work that has been done so so far. i wanted to express three quick concerns. number one, the restocking fee at $10 million, that is a large amount of money, and potentially could represent a significant increase in volume, so we would ask you to look at lowering that number. secondly, assembly 48 which passed in the same year as assembly

bill 481, restricts the use of chemical weapons, flash bags, bean bags and those kind of things in crowd control. it significantly restricts it and we ask you to integrate these policies with ab48. lastly, i believe that currently we have robots authorized for deadly force which could be used to remote control kill someone. this is what oakland considered and sort of stepped back from, because it is really scary, and i would ask that san francisco also consider stepping back from having that kind of equipment authorized for basically remote control killing. so, thank you and have a good day. >> thank you. can we have our next caller,

please? >> hello. my name is (inaudible) buller. i'm a community activist of many years. i pointed out and read the law if enforcement equipment use of policy and recommended edits of ab481 and interested to heard the comments made before me and i want to say i appreciate greatly the hard work that supervisor peskin has done in dealing with what is put before him. i want to say that i find this a bazaar way to deal with our fear of the other. we at present in our community and our nation are faced with a lot of unrest

and to over-react to that by way of allowing expenditures to the police department that can result in serious harm to members of our public is really unthinkable. so, i (inaudible) i support the use of the funds used to supply and to -use of any military weapons for-instead use for social services and unmet community needs. furthermore, i would like the proud city of san francisco to send a message to the federal government legislators, the weapons manufacturers, u.s. military, the police force itself

and general public that we do not want or need military weapons to handle our civic affairs and prefer to use the funds for police training in community relations, non violent interventions and management of law enforcement and in addition meeting community needs. thank you for your attention and i wish you all great luck. >> thank you. can we have our next caller, please? >> (inaudible) my god. so, first off, we always have a bunch of people that don't live in san francisco that want to come on and advocate for what is going on in san francisco. you need to stop that. number 2, the police-there

are lot of good police officers. i had seen them last night (inaudible) deal compassionately and not with assault rifles. (inaudible) when you are saying that the criminals are taking over the streets, you need to look at why are we not holding other agencies account able for the work they are supposed to be doing? i think there should be a medium in there for assault rifles and at the same time held accountable. the (inaudible) it ends up here in our community. i mean, they have all these stuff up there and on january 6 when they had the insurrection (inaudible) because they were a lot of white people. one person got shot. (inaudible) black lives matter and they were doing peaceful protest so therefore we can't take away everything from the police to do their job. at the same time

you can't give them everything- [difficulty hearing speaker due to audio quality] for the work they are supposed to be doing (inaudible) their job for mental health to call the police and then do it in a compassionate way. we need to find a medium and stop allowing people that do not live in san francisco, white people that dont live in san francisco to speak up for san francisco when it is not for us in the first place. it will cause more harm to our communities (inaudible) that's my two cents of the whole thing- >> your time elapsed. thank you. that was our last caller for public comment. >> okay. public comment for today at least is closed, and colleagues as previously discussed i make a motion to continue this to our

meeting of november 14. on that motion, a roll call, please. >> yes, on the motion to continue the matter to november 14- [roll call] motion passes without objection. >> alright. next and last item please. see you wednesday. >> next on the agenda is item 6. ordinance amending the campaign governmental conduct code to update the conflict of interest code form 700 filing requirements by adding deleting and changing titles of certain designated officials and employees to reflect organizational and staffing changes and by refining disclosure requirements for certain designated officials and employees. >> alright. we have been asked by the department of human resources that is still meeting and

conferring to continue this item to the 12 day of december, but meanwhile, we have a few amendments to discuss that i will pull up here in a minute. i got from president walton's office that seem to be relatively de minimis in nature but require continuance anyway. added 1 position to city attorney office restoring the two disclosures from fine art museum and city administrator. adding the refuse rate board to (inaudible) and a new section 3.1-397 as the-i have a couple questions we can figure out between now and december 12 as it

relates to the refuse rate administrator on page 17, which sets the rate administrator-this was at the suggestion of the controller as a disclosure category 2, and i think we should think about whether that should be a disclosure category 1. the way it is currently written, the refuse rate administrator when that individual is retained by the city pursuant to proposition f of last june, would only have to disclose their investments and positions in a business entity which is engaged in the refuse business in san francisco. i found that maybe to be too narrow. to the extent

that there is every competition in this arena as it relates to refuse other then by recumbent recology provider it seems to me this individual should have to disclose any relations with any refuse business regardless whether they have business in san francisco or not. so, madam deputy city attorney, i assume we can take this up with the controller and deal with it in the interim. >> deputy city attorney ann pearson. yes the controller office has recommended the designation and they can explain why they went with the 2 instead of 1. as to the issue about disclosures related to interest outside the jurisdiction, this is drafted to conform or operationalize the political format and that state law requires disclosures of financial interest within a jurisdiction.

so, all of disclosures respect within the jurisdiction. that is why this is drafted the way it is. the board could certainly decide this is a position that should make additional disclosures above and beyond those required by state law, but that would probably need to be codified elsewhere. >> alright. thank you for that. the only other thing which is super nit-picky that i'll add is just i never heard-this is page 18 of a director of public space regeneration. what is that? this is not exactly rhetorical question, but i wouldn't mind hearing from the economic workforce development office what that is. there is some other

goofy new titles. deputy director of community economic development invest in neighborhoods. i guess maybe we knew that, but public space regeneration, what is that? are there any members of the public who like to testify on this item? >> yes, members of the public who wish to speak on this item and joining in person can line up to speak at this time. for those listening remotely call 415-655-0001 and enter id24889 aket 77754 and pound and pound again. once connected you need to press 3 to enter the speaker line. for those already in the queue please continue to wait until the system indicates you run muted and that is your queue to begin comments. there are no members in the room. we have one caller on the line for public comment at this time. can we have our first caller?

>> great. david pillpel, one of my favorite tasks to go through. throughout i think generic titles like manager 1, manager 3 can be more specific. some departments have that, others don't. i don't understand why a number of policy and communication positions are category 1 and not category 2 where that exists. it seems they would have limited ability to make decisions that implicate coi issues. very specific airport, page 4-11 i would use divisions because the airport is large and it is difficult to figure which positions if they are not set up by division. the controller, page 18, i don't understand the reference to these prop q whatever it is instigator positions. i think that could be better explained or more specific. dem page 19, i would use divisions. there are

too many abbreviations with respect to dem about (inaudible) some of us know what that means but it is not particularly clear. page 22, 918 may not deed division since it is so small and there is reference to new positions on one line i think could be struck. dhr, page 34, lines 10 and 11, again, prop q positions. puc, page 39 to 50. again, i would use divisions. this is proposing to collapse all that. saf, page 56-58. i don'ts think the lower level positions need to be category 1. that seems inconsistent with other departments and perhaps inconsistent with their responsibilitiess and finally, ocii page 59, line 2, i believe the sub-a in parenthesis at the beginning can be deleted. if you want to advise if there is someone i should follow up with on these specifics i'm happy to communicate

that and look forward to the further hearing on this in december. thanks. >> thank you. any other members for this item? >> no additional callers for this matter. >> alright. to the speaker, if you want to put that in an e-mail and send it to the clerk of this committee, he will dissiminate it to the appropriate parties. public comment is closed. i will make a motion to adopt the amendments circulated by nattily gee on behalf of president walton and make one other additional amendment at page 17 at section 3.1-195 to change the refuse rate administrator from disclosure category 2 to disclosure category

1. and on that double amendment or two amendments in one, a roll call please. >> on the motion to amend-- [roll call] >> motion passes without objection. >> alright. and then depending on what the voters decide tomorrow, we may or may not on december 12 take out the reference to the department of streets and sanitation, but we'll figure that out tomorrow night or december 12, which ever comes first. i make a motion to continue the item as amended to december 12. >> motion to continue to december 12- [roll call] >> the motion passes

without objection. >> we are adjourned. [meeting adjourned] >> the board of san francisco waterfront stretches 7 and a half miles and while it seems it will always be there, our waterfront needs us. san francisco faces coastal flooding due

to climate change with expecting sea level rise up to 7 feet by the year 2100. we also need to strengthen the wateren front gaest urblth quake risk. the waterfront resilience program is leading a city wide effort to adapt the waterfront kaess this unique combination of risks. what is at stake? small businesses nearby housing open spaces and attractions and initial historic district, mare i time and industrial use, transportation like bart and muni, critical drinking and wastewater utility and disaster response facility. guided by robust public engagement process since 2018, the port and city and federal agency partners have developed waterfront adaptation strategies for public review and engagement. adaptation strategies are a combinationf construction projethss and policies to defend san francisco against flood and earthquake

riskbs to create a resilient sustainable equitalb waterfront for the next 100 years. we'll need to use different approaches dependling on the unique characteristics of each neighborhood and shoreline. continuing to defend locations against current and future flooding at the shoreline while defending further inland in other locations to create space for our expecting future fwluding. the port is committed to insure adaptation strategy create students for san francisco historically underserved communities. we want residents to engage in decision making and benefit directly. we have a once in a generation chance to defend waterfront jobs, housing and public spaces from floods and earthquakes and reiman jts with more pub luck open space, better access improved mobility somewhere enhanced ecology. join the port of san francisco and let your voice be heard on the future of our waterfront. learn more at

sfport.com/wrp. >> i don't think you need to be an expert to look around and see the increasing frequency of fires throughout california. they are continuing at an ever-increasing rate every summer, and as we all know, the

drought continues and huge shortages of water right now. i don't think you have to be an expert to see the impact. when people create greenhouse gases, we are doing so by different activities like burning fossil fuels and letting off carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and we also do this with food waste. when we waste solid food and leave it in the landfill, it puts methane gas into the atmosphere and that accelerates the rate at which we are warming our planet and makes all the effects of climate change worse. the good news is there are a lot of things that you can be doing, particularly composting and the added benefit is when the compost is actually applied to the soil, it has the ability to reverse climate change by pulling carbon out of the atmosphere and into the soil and the t radios. and there is huge amount of science that is breaking right now around that.

>> in the early 90s, san francisco hired some engineers to analyze the material san francisco was sending to landfill. they did a waste characterization study, and that showed that most of the material san francisco was sending to landfill could be composted. it was things like food scraps, coffee grounds and egg shells and sticks and leaves from gardening. together re-ecology in san francisco started this curbside composting program and we were the first city in the country to collect food scraps separately from other trash and turn them into compost. it turns out it was one of the best things we ever did. it kept 2.5 million tons of material out of the landfill, produced a beautiful nutrient rich compost that has gone on to hundreds of farms, orchards and vineyards. so in that way you can manage your food scraps and produce far

less methane. that is part of the solution. that gives people hope that we're doing something to slow down climate change. >> i have been into organic farming my whole life. when we started planting trees, it was natural to have compost from re-ecology. compost is how i work and the soil biology or the microbes feed the plant and our job as regenerative farmers is to feed the microbes with compost and they will feed the plant. it is very much like in business where you say take care of your employees and your employees will take carolinas of your customers. the same thing. take care of the soil microbes and soil life and that will feed and take care of the plants. >> they love compost because it is a nutrient rich soil amendment. it is food for the soil. that is photosynthesis. pulling carbon from the

atmosphere. pushing it back into the soil where it belongs. and the roots exude carbon into the soil. you are helping turn a farm into a carbon sink. it is an international model. delegations from 135 countries have come to study this program. and it actually helped inspire a new law in california, senate bill 1383. which requires cities in california to reduce the amount of compostable materials they send to landfills by 75% by 2025. and san francisco helped inspire this and this is a nation-leading policy. >> because we have such an immature relationship with nature and the natural cycles and the carbon cycles, government does have to step in and protect the commons, which is soil, ocean, foryes, sir, and so forth. -- forest, and so fors. we know that our largest corporations are a significant percentage of carbon emission, and that the corporate community

has significant role to play in reducing carbon emissions. unfortunately, we have no idea and no requirement that they disclose anything about the carbon footprint, the core operation and sp360 stands for the basic notion that large corporations should be transparent about the carbon footprint. it makes all the sense in the world and very common sense but is controversial. any time you are proposing a policy that is going to make real change and that will change behavior because we know that when corporations have to disclose and be transparent and have that kind of accountability, there is going to be opposition. >> we have to provide technical assistance to comply with the state legislation sb1383 which requires them to have a food donation program. we keep the edible food local. and we are not composting it because we don't want to compost

edible food. we want that food to get eaten within san francisco and feed folks in need. it is very unique in san francisco we have such a broad and expansive education program for the city. but also that we have partners in government and nonprofit that are dedicated to this work. at san francisco unified school district, we have a sustainability office and educators throughout the science department that are building it into the curriculum. making it easy for teachers to teach about this. we work together to build a pipeline for students so that when they are really young in pre-k, they are just learning about the awe and wonder and beauty of nature and they are connecting to animals and things they would naturally find love and affinity towards. as they get older, concepts that keep them engaged like society and people and economics.

>> california is experiencing many years of drought. dry periods. that is really hard on farms and is really challenging. compost helps farms get through these difficult times. how is that? compost is a natural sponge that attracts and retains water. and so when we put compost around the roots of plants, it holds any moisture there from rainfall or irrigation. it helps farms make that corner and that helps them grow for food. you can grow 30% more food in times of drought in you farm naturally with compost. farms and cities in california are very hip now to this fact that creating compost, providing compost to farms helps communities survive and get through those dry periods. >> here is the thing. soil health, climate health, human health, one conversation. if we grow our food differently,

we can capture all that excess carbon in the atmosphere and store it in unlimited quantities in the soil, that will create nutrient dense foods that will take care of most of our civilized diseases. so it's one conversation. people have to understand that they are nature. they can't separate. we started prowling the high plains in the 1870s and by the 1930s, 60 year, we turned it into a dust bowl. that is what ignorance looks like when you don't pay attention to nature. nature bats last. so people have to wake up. wake up. compost. >> it is really easy to get frustrated because we have this belief that you have to be completely sustainable 24/7 in all aspects of your life. it is not about being perfect. it is about making a change here, a change there in your life. maybe saying, you know what? i don't have to drive to that particular place today. today i am going to take the bus

or i'm going to walk. it is about having us is stainable in mind. that is -- it is about having sustainability in mind. that is how we move the dial. you don't have to be perfect all the time. >> san francisco has been and will continue to be one of the greener cities because there are communities who care about protecting a special ecosystem and habitat. thinking about the history of the ohlone and the native and indigenous people who are stewards of this land from that history to now with the ambitious climate action plan we just passed and the goals we have, i think we have a dedicated group of people who see the importance of this place. and who put effort into building an infrastructure that actually makes it possible. >> we have a long history starting with the gold rush and the anti-war activism and that is also part of the environmental movement in the 60s and 70s. and of course, earth day in 1970

which is huge. and i feel very privileged to work for the city because we are on such a forefront of environmental issues, and we get calls from all over the world really to get information. how do cities create waste programs like they do in san francisco. we are looking into the few which you are and we want innovation. we want solutions.

>> manufacturing in cities creates this perfect platform for people to earn livelihoods and for people to create more economic prosperity. i'm kate sosa. i'm cofounder and ceo of sf made. sf made is a public private partnership in the city of san francisco to

help manufacturers start, grow, and stay right here in san francisco. sf made really provides wraparound resources for manufacturers that sets us apart from other small business support organizations who provide more generalized support. everything we do has really been developed over time by listening and thinking about what manufacturer needs grow. for example, it would be traditional things like helping them find capital, provide assistance loans, help to provide small business owners with education. we have had some great experience doing what you might call pop ups or temporary selling events, and maybe the most recent example was one that we did as part of sf made week in partnership with the city seas partnership with

small business, creating a 100 company selling day right here at city hall, in partnership with mayor lee and the board of supervisors, and it was just a wonderful opportunity for many of our smaller manufacturers who may be one or two-person shop, and who don't have the wherewithal to have their own dedicated retail store to show their products and it comes back to how do we help companies set more money into arthur businesses and develop more customers and their relationships, so that they can continue to grow and continue to stay here in san francisco. i'm amy kascel, and i'm the owner of amy kaschel san francisco. we started our line with wedding gowns, and about a year ago, we launched a ready

to wear collection. san francisco's a great place to do business in terms of clientele. we have wonderful brides from all walks of life and doing really interesting things: architects, doctors, lawyers, teachers, artists, other like minded entrepreneurs, so really fantastic women to work with. i think it's important for them to know where their clothes are made and how they're made. >> my name is jefferson mccarly, and i'm the general manager of the mission bicycle company. we sell bikes made here for people that ride here. essentially, we sell city bikes made for riding in urban environments. our core business really is to build bikes specifically for each individual. we care a lot about craftsmanship, we care a lot about quality, we care about good design, and people

like that. when people come in, we spend a lot of time going to the design wall, and we can talk about handle bars, we can see the riding position, and we take notes all over the wall. it's a pretty fun shopping experience. paragraph. >> for me as a designer, i love the control. i can see what's going on, talk to my cutter, my pattern maker, looking at the designs. going through the suing room, i'm looking at it, everyone on the team is kind of getting involved, is this what that drape look? is this what she's expecting, maybe if we've made a customization to a dress, which we can do because we're making everything here locally. over the last few years, we've been more technical. it's a

great place to be, but you know, you have to concentrate and focus on where things are going and what the right decisions are as a small business owner. >> sometimes it's appropriate to bring in an expert to offer suggestions and guidance in coaching and counseling, and other times, we just need to talk to each other. we need to talk to other manufacturers that are facing similar problems, other people that are in the trenches, just like us, so that i can share with them a solution that we came up with to manage our inventory, and they can share with me an idea that they had about how to overcome another problem. >> moving forward, where we see ourselves down the road, maybe five and ten years, is really looking at a business from a little bit more of a ready to wear perspective and making things that are really

thoughtful and mindful, mindful of the end user, how they're going to use it, whether it's the end piece or a wedding gown, are they going to use it again, and incorporating that into the end collection, and so that's the direction i hear at this point. >> the reason we are so enamored with the work we do is we really do see it as a platform for changing and making the city something that it has always been and making sure that we're sharing the opportunities that we've been blessed with economically and socially as possible,

>> still a lot of people wonder since the trees have a lot of

issues, why did we plant them in the first place? >> trees are widely planted in san francisco. with good reason. they are workhorses when it comes to urban forestry. we have begun to see our ficustrees are too big and dangerous in san francisco. we have a lot of tree failures with this species in particular. this is a perfect example of the challenges with the structure of the ficustrees. you can see four very large stems that are all coming from the same main truck. you can see the two branches attached to one another at a really sharp angle. in between you can't it is a lot of strong wood. they are attached so sharply together. this is a much weaker union of a branch than if you had a wide

angel. this is what it looks like after the fi c.u. resolution s limb l. >> we see decline. you can see the patches where there aren't any leaves at all. that is a sign the tree is in decline. the other big challenge is the root system of the tree are aggressive and can impact nearby utilities, and we can fix the sidewalk around the tree in many cases. we don't want to cuts the roots too severely because we can destabilize the tree. >> in a city like san francisco our walks are not that wide. we have had to clear the branches away from the properties. most of the canopy is on the street side and that is

heavyweight on those branches out over the street. that can be a factor in tree limb failures. a lot of people wonder since these trees have a lot of issues. why did we plant them in the first place? they provided the city with benefits for decades. they are big and provide storage for carbon which is important to fight climate change and they provide shade and really i think many people think they are a beautiful asset. >> when we identify trees like this for removal and people protest our decision, we really understand where they are coming from. i got into this job because i love trees. it just breaks my heart to cut down trees, particularly if they are healthy and the issue is a structural flaw. i have also seen first hand what happens when we have failures.

we have had a couple of injuries due to tree failures. that is something we can't live with either. it is a challenging situation. we hate to lose mature trees, but public safety has to always

but publsan francisco to always

>> and entered webinar id 852-0513-0680 and sfgtv is broadcasting the instructions on the screen if you're watching the broadcast. listen for the public comment portion for your item to be called and dial star nine which is equivalent to raise your hand so we know you want to speak. you will be brought to the hearing when it's your turn want you may need to dial star six to unmute. you three minutes and you will have a verbal warning before the time is up. please know there's a delay what is streamed on the inter net and important to turn off the volume otherwise there's interference with the

meeting if you need accommodations and send an email to our website. now the chat function can't be used to provide public comment or opinions. we will take public comment from the member who is are physically present in the hearing room. now we will swear in or affirm all those that intend to testify. any members of the board may speak pursuant to the rights under the sunshine. if you want to -- (paused). to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. okay. thank you. if you're a participant and not speaking please go on mute so commissioners we do have one housekeeping item.

for 8a and 8b and at 1801 broderick street the planning department is asking for revocation and the permit holder agreed to this recommendation so we need a motion to grant the appeals and revoke the permit it wasn't properly issued. >> mr. lopez if you like to make that motion. >> we have commissioner lemberg is raising his hand i would move to grab the appeal and over turn the permit on the basis it wasn't properly issued. >> okay. vice president lopez did you want to add anything? i didn't mean to -- >> i didn't see. sorry commissioner. i didn't see you raising your hand and that will create an issue and sensitivity for tonight with the two remote commissioners it's hard to --

>> i see them on your zoom screen and if their hand is raised i will try to keep you aware of that. >> thanks a lot. >> thank you. so is there any public comment on the motion to grant the appeal and revoke the permit. please raise your hand. okay. i don't see any hands raised so on that motion vice president lopez. >> aye. >> commissioner trasuina. >> aye. >> eppler. >> aye. >> president swig. >> aye. >> so that motion carries five to answer and the appeals are granted. thank you. so wool now move it to item 2. this is general public comment and the opportunity for anyone who would like to within the board's jurisdiction but not on tonight's calendar. is there condition that would like to speak on an item? okay. you have plea minutes. >> thank you very much julie. can you hear me? >> yes, i can. >> excuse me julie.

>> i'm sorry, one moment. yes? >> as he is a potential -- has potential to be speaking on an item that we will hear several weeks from now can you please -- >> okay. mr. murmudo your general public comment should be on general matters since you're the representative for cases coming up on november 6 -- >> i will only say to mr. swig i have the right to make public comment in my opinion and the thing things i'm going to say relate to taxing matters but not to the two lant lants. >> okay. that's fine. thank you. we're just clarifying in advance. please go ahead. >> thank you. a few days ago i sent your board a synopsis of october 18 sfmta board meeting agenda item in which staff tried to remove

taxi appeals from the jurisdiction. at the urengaging of stakeholders the commissioner successfully severed the issue basically a rider amendment to the unrepresented calendar item. the director has a wonderful resume and his stint for 20 years as the executive director of the metropolitan commission and staff gave misleading to questions he asked and i provided answers to him by this sinopises. when kate torn was asked about the revocation of cases and said unprincipled permit holders were involved and describing appellants and low hanging fruit -- >> became taxi law

[inaudible] and transportation director ed reiskin asked for amendments which the agency board approved and one provision required a cdl for taxi renewal and targets elderly and disabled persons that can't get a cdl due to disabilities. those career workers are not ignoring a basic requirement rather sfmta created a capricious hurdle that workers cannot clear and getting the permits in the agency's benefit. hundreds of now elderly or disables taxi drivers obtain the valuable permits which served as a de facto pension. unfortunately for the past years we have been ubered out of that anticipated income. 25 years ago

wal-mart super store similarly engaged and small grows out of their safings and their businesses. the medallion value is returning and protect them -- >> 30 seconds. >> thanks. made your board aware of these mashinations and this disingenuineness in all matters listed hereunder constitute a consent agenda are considered to be routines. thank you very much. >> okay. thank you. we'll now hear from mg. please go ahead. you need to unmute yourself. okay. i think he did so. yes we can. you're a bit low. >> okay. well i will try speaking up. good evening president swig, board members. mark grubber taxi driver and board members of the san francisco taxi

drivers alliance, taxi workers alliance i should say. i want to address the issue of your jurisdiction holder and taxi permits appeals. 10 years ago the issue came before this board after the mta issued a large number of taxi medallions to cab companies in violation of the provisions of the police code then in effect. united taxicab workers a predecessor for the current union attempted to file an appeal. the executive director at the time rejected the application so we filed a request for jurisdiction. we had the disadvantage of appearing before a four member board that denied jurisdiction on a vote of 2-2. our argument mainly rested on charter section as cited which governs the right of appeals to this board of permit decisions of all city departments and limited and explicit

protections taxy permits want being among them. the mta maintains that the provisions governing the mta supersede the provisions of section 4.106b. we argue that any seeming conflict between these sections can and should be reconcileed in favor of preserving this precious right which is so important to cab drivers who most often can't afford to take an appeal to court. i will be sending the board a copy of the brief we submitted on our jurisdiction request. it contains out dated references to appealed sections of the police code but the discussion the charter which is the main discussion is as pertinent today as it was then. i hope you will take a look at it before your hearing of the 16th. thank you. >> thank you. we will now hear from

the caller ending 1045. okay. go ahead. . >> hi. [inaudible] former cab driver whose medallion was removed by vet connection and i have no reason to expect a sympathy and compassion or kindness out of the commission but i do have the expectation for rule of law, and i'm not seeing it and quite dismayed. [inaudible] involved in a legal dispute that results in my favor. thank you. >> thank you. is there any further general public comment please raise your hand. okay. i don't

see any more public comment at this point so we will move on to item 3. commissioner comments and questions. >> commissioners both present and virtual? any questions, comments? hearing none. >> okay. >> julie item number one i think [inaudible] discussed. >> pardon? >> the resolution for consideration. >> oh yes. we passed over right over item number one. let me see. let's go back to that. thank you. we're moving along too quickly here. so item number one is a special item consideration of public adoption of a resolution which make findings of the teleconference meeting under the government code subsection e so commissioners we would need a motion to adopt this resolution. >> i will put forth that motion. >> okay. is there

any public comment on this item please raise your hand. i don't see any hands raised so on the motion to adopt the resolution vice president lopez. >> aye. >> commissioner trasuina. >> yes. >> commissioner lemberg. >> aye. >> commissioner her. >> aye. >> okay. that carries and that is adopted and thank you alex for the-- >> you're okay? >> yeah. >> good. >> so we're moving on adoption of the minutes. before you commissioners is the possible adoption of the october 19, 2022 minutes. >> commissioners any changes recommended or otherwise? and do i have a motion? >> motion to adopt. >> okay. we have a

motion from vice president lopez to adopt the minutes. is there any public comment on that motion please raise your hand. i don't see public comment so that motion. commissioner trasuina. >> yes. >> commissioner lemberg. >> aye. >> commissioner eppler. >> aye. >> president swig. >> aye. >> okay that motion carries 5-0 and the minutes are adopted. we are now moving on to item number five. this is a special item. every overview of the unit unit programs. this is a presentation by natalia kwiatkowska, a principal planner and dee coordinator on dee programs and the presentation will cover the a local adu program and the state adu program and the hybrid adu program so welcome ms. kwiatkowska. we look forward to your presentation. >> good evening commissioners. natalia kwiatkowska planning department staff. i'm going to share my screen so

just let me know once you see it. >> we can see it. thank you. >> okay. i am here today to talk to you all about our program and as you're listening to this presentation all of the photos conclude on the on the adu so i hope you enjoy. we will start with a little bit of background of the the majority of this presentation will focus on definitions and programs and then basically go over resources and our process. starting with background adus became the topic back in 2014 for many reasons why this started. some of these that we saw many illegal units in the city and because of the housing crisis we wanted to provide an opportunity to legalize these units and to build more

housing. at the time the department of building inspection [inaudible] was commencing so this was a great opportunity for property owners that were already doing construction to at the same time add additional dwelling units. then adus found to be easy to construct so when does this happen? going back to 2014 is when we saw the program and i will go that in more detail. at the same time there was a adu pilot in san francisco and started in castro and district six and eight. at the same time [inaudible] was happening so adus with retroactive projects and the pilot was so successful and adus were available city-wide as long as they met parameters and state law caught up and

allowed them through the state ministerial process. it was limiting and only one in an existing family dwelling. in 2019 our local adu program was significantly expanded to allow them in new construction. this was a significant change and in 2020 state law went through major amendments to also allow them in the new construction similar to the local program and then today adus are basically allowed as long as they set and meet certain parameters. moving on to definitions of programs. a accessory dwelling unit which i will refer to as adu and referred as the secondary unit, [inaudible] cot annuals. at the end of the day they're residential units added to new and existing residential buildings. when

talking about adu i thought it would be helpful to add legalize units in san francisco so our first option is [inaudible] units so picture a single family home in a zoning district that allows two or more units. you would be principally permitted to add more units to max your density and this option you are required to meet all planning code requirements that are relevant. then our second option is the legalization program. this is often referred to as the amnesty program but there's an important distinction. units going through the legalization programs and not technically adus but legalized units and this program has a big incentive that some planning code requirements are flat out waived. there is a requirement that the units must have been used independently prior to 2013 so an illegal

unit was added after 2013 or lacks that evidence there's other ways to legalize it as the right or adu program and the adu program as i mentioned is a city-wide program and lets owners exceed the density in the lot and in the single family home scenario it's a single family and they don't have the opportunity to add more dwelling units under the zoning district. this allows them to exceed that and then we have the [inaudible] program and the local, state and hybrid so a little more detail as of the as of right units. as i mentioned the number of units varies depending on the zoning district and the number of units on the property andeck checked on the property information map. it's important to know there are no eligibility requirements. and this option a property owner is required to meet all relevant planning code requirements. there are no waivers

available to these. it's a requirement can't be met it would require a variance application. now with the [inaudible] units there are no restrictions. these units can be sold separately condos and subdivided. they can be used for short term rental as long as they follow the regulations and these units are not subject to rent control. they're newly created units. now with the legalization programs limited to one [inaudible] per lot so we often see properties with multiple units and we get creative and other ways to legalize them and with this option as i mentioned there's a couple eligibility requirements. one of them is that the unit must existed and then used independently prior to 2013. there's also a eviction search so if there's no fault evictions in that unit the

property owner would be unable to go through the legalization program to add the unit for a certain timeframe and with option the incentive is some of the planning code requirements are waived and then the [inaudible] exposure. it doesn't need to be met for the unauthorized unit and these are existing units. we're not trying to force property owners into significant modifications. that would make it financially difficult to add these units and legalize them. there are some requirements that do have to be met. they're smaller in nature such as landscaping and the front setback and things like that. all right. moving on to our adu program. we've got our state program and the local program and began first in 2014 and today a number of

aloud varies. they're allowed in existing and proposed single and fam multi-family and exceptions from [inaudible] from adus added to existing units and we've got the state program which is the state mandated option. it only allows adding one adu in proposed or existing multi-family and only permitted on property that no other adus and with this option there's not required to meet all planning code requirements similar to the legalization program exposure, open space do not need to be met and then we have the hybrid program and a subset of state law so it's still a state mandated program. the number of adus varies. they're allowed in existing and proposed single family or only in existing multi-family homes and the reason we came up with

this name even though it's a state mandated program these adus are subject to the relative planning code requirements without the option for a waiver so it's the state requirement so it requires local compliance so now i thought we would go over a couple of adus that we see today and the difficult one are conversions and new units that convert space in the residential building and common ones in san francisco and converting garages and storage areas and living rooms and things like that. next is [inaudible]. these are new units that extend an residential building and think of horizontal expansion of the rear and things like that and a new concept from state law in 2020 is detached adu and free standing buildings located on a residential property so we often see them in backyards. we

haven't seen many in san francisco as you can imagine corner and some lots are the best candidates to physically build and construct them and then the last type is which is a new type of adu available through state law is called a junior adu so this is a conversion type of adu. it's only available in single family homes and it's limited in square footage. we think of these often as caretaker units and there's an opportunity to connect the junior adu with the primary single family home. all right. now getting into the details of each program starting with the local program the number of adus varies as i mentioned. for existing buildings if the lots have four or less existing units only one adu is allowed. if the lots have five or more existing legal

units and an unlimited number of adus are allowed. there's incentive for properties going through dbi or mandatory or voluntary [inaudible] and they're allowed an unlimited number of adus. this is very similar to new construction but it's dependent on what the zoning district allows and if it's four or less you can have one adu. if it's five or more units there's no cap on the number of adus allowed and similar to the legalization program there's an eligibility requirement that includes eviction search so certain no fault evictions anywhere on the property would prevent the owner from using our local adu program for certain timeframe. with our local program there is required compliance with planning code requirements. however, adus adding to existing buildings benefit from waivers from some of the big planning code

requirements and density and open space and partial expose and you are adus added to new construction only benefit from the density waiver. there are some restrictions tied to the local adus. typically they cannot be sold or condos or subdivided and supposed to be rental units however there's an exemption of adus added to property going through the retroactive program and those can be condod if they qualify. local adus cannot be used as shelter rentals and typically local ones are second to rent control and go through the [inaudible] and subject them to rent control. moving on to the state program like i mentioned it only allows one adu on the property. the only eligibility requirement is that there are no other adus and there's partial requirements of

planning code requirement so very small items are required such as landscaping, those big ticket items and fence and open space and do not need to be met for the state adus. and then there are some restrictions tied to these. these state adus cannot be sold so no condo subdivision and not be short term rentals however they're not subject to rent control. and then moving on to our last program, the hybrid program. the number of adus allows varies. in single family homes you can one ether a conversion detached and one junior and -- (stand by) or up to 25% of the

existing units whichever is higher so you have 100 units and 25% is 25 adus allowed. there are no eligibility requirements similar and then there is a requirement to meet the planning code. as i mentioned before the reason we call this hybrid because it's a state mandated program but subject to the local planning code so the big ticket items such as open space, exposure, rear yard has to be met and there's no available variances or waiver oh exceptions on these. the only exception is density and they're allowed to exceed the density. similar to the state adu hybrid adus cannot be sold. they can not be used as short term rentals and not subject to rent control. so there are some benefits that we outline for the state mandated adus, both state and

hybrid programs. the benefits are ministerial and streamline review processes. they're secretary to a 60 day review timeline from the. >> . >> complete application. there's no subjective design review. there's a small exception for [inaudible] property. they're not subject to ceqa, not subject to our neighborhood notification process. there's no discretionary review opportunity and this one you're aware of and a shortened appeal window and heard within 30 [inaudible] days and no opportunity for rehearing and this subject the adus to rent control. now moving on to some of the resources. we've got sort of two main locations for them. we have many resources on our planning department adu page at our website

and the city has great adus pages as well and s fdot goff and the city pages include everything outside of planning and requirements from building, processes, things like that and then we have dedicated adu planners within our department and we can be reached for questions at our website. now moving on to process, so super exciting that today everything can be submittedod line so that city website at s fdot gov a customer doesn't have to visit the city to get their permit. everything is submitted on line and everything is issued electronically as well. so this really does comply with the 60 day review timeline. provides streamline and review and this completes my presentation and i am available for questions.

>> okay. thank you so much. we have question from president swig is. >> thank you. the more i know the more confused i get. i am confused about -- there are three buckets. there's local, state and then hybrid. we had a hearing here a couple weeks ago that was designated as a state adu, and therefore subject to some rules, and by which we went and made our ruling accordingly, but where does that designation between local, state and hybrid get made? when does that happen? how does that happen? and why is there

more than one at this point? >> great questions. the distinction is often made by our planning department staff. depending on the property type, the number of units and the property there might be more than one option for the property owner to add an adu and an example of adding one adu and customers can pick between the programs. we work with the customer to pick the program that is best for them, outline the benefits, things like that. most of our data shows that multi-family properties end up using our local program because they're able to get more adus permitted. most single family homes use the state program and they're only looking to add one adu and streamline and the ministerial review that come with that program. the hybrid program is barely

used because it's really difficult to meet all of the planning code requirements and not seek a waiver or a variance from it, so often if an applicant wants to look the a hybrid program but need a waiver they will go to the local program to be able to use a waiver from that requirement. we have f and qs on the website to help customers pick but we have this conversation to see what bucket they fall into. >> my second question of three is going back to the hearing that we had a couple weeks ago which involved a adu being built in what was represented as a storage shed, and then it was built according to all the statutes again in

the state adu program. it seemed to fly -- one of the discussions it seemed to fly in the face of other requirements for other things such as a variance. in this case the adu was being built mid-block in a backyard. again it hit all the rights according to the state adu yet in this midblock situation where there was wide open park like atmosphere as is typical in many of san francisco's blocks here was this building which ended up being 16 feet i think total according to the statute popping up and

disturbing the seemingly the midspace, the midblock open space and thus flying in the face of what in a variance we would say out of character with the rest of the neighborhood. how does planning sort these dilemmas out where there might be a conflict with other statutes? >> thank you for the question. the state makes it easy for us and they're allowed if they meet the points and so we have conversations with the planning commission where they were concerned with midblock open space with the residential guidelines and state law because the adus are not subject to them or making it ministerial and the review so this is a local adu we do have that discretion to require compliance with

the design guidelines to prevent these adus from taking away from open space, housing services. state law does not give us that discretion. we do often encourage applicants even when using the state program to provide design input and ask them to consider certain features to be included in the project. >> thank you. final question. quite often when we've had adu situations i know in my neighborhood where i live in the marina it seems that several of the historical large format maybe i'm guessing three or four story apartment buildings are converting copious amount was garage space to adus and when we've seen some of these activities here in a hearing in the past

there seems to be, and we get an appeal on it, it often seems to be related to tenants rights and lease contracts and the like. how does planning deal with the challenge of how to sort out what our are tenants rights and legal statutes related to lease agreements and the legalities, otherwise the legalities of building an adu and i am talking about things like storage units or laundry rooms, bike racks, things that are quite often written into a simple rental lease? >> sure. thank you for the question. and it various depending on the use of these programs. the short answer we work closely with

[inaudible]. the long answer for state and hybrid we don't have the discretion and local programs and the ones that are multi-story, multi-unit buildings that are converts garages and other spaces. they're required to comply with supervisor mandelman's ordinance that was effective in 2021 and requires the property owner to provide a notice to all their tenants informing them there will be adus proposed and a declaration saying whether there housing services that will be impacted. adus cannot remove housing services so through the adu notice and declarations there's an opportunity for any of the tenants to petition their rent board or determination if they believe there will be an impact on their

housing services and our local planning code says we can't approve a adu for the local program if the determination or declaration says there's anup pact on housing services, and so that bucket really fits into more of the multi-story, multi-unit program. if a property owner chooses to go to the state or hybrid program and meet the parameters we're not required to apply the requirements for that. with the represent board that's an option for a tenant to seek their help whether housing services are impacted. i believe that often results in pay -- excuse me, a rent's reduction or assistance and they often get creative and provide a lot of input in that process. >> thank you very much. i yield to

clapboard vinyl. >> thank you president swig and thank you ms. kwiatkowska for the excellent presentation. it's helpful to me as a new member of the board and i am sure it's helpful to members of the public as well as adus become larger and all throughout the city. a question just briefly on the what you describe as a sales prohibition. can you elaborate a little bit more as to how that -- how that prohibition is in effect? is there -- are there time limits for them? if the main unit is sold does that have an impact? >> sure. thank you for the question. so all these adus exempt for the one exception for adus added in conjunction with the [inaudible] cannot be sold separately so no condo subdivision. this memorialized as i

notice of special restriction that the property owners sign, notearize and in the recorders office and live with the property in perpetuity and no impact on the existing units that are adu. if they qualify for a condo or subdivision and available they're able to go through that. the adu would have have to be tied to one of the lots so it stays as a rental unit. the one exception that i mentioned is for adus added in conjunction with the seismic seismic retrofit and remain with the condo if available. >> they can be sold but not separately from the main unit. is that right? >> yes. >> thank you. >> okay. thank you. any other commissioner questions or comments? >> i want to make sure that our two commissioners at home are fully recognized and they have the ability to

ask questions. >> i don't see their hands raised. i see a smile so bear with us. >> thank you. >> so we will now move on to public comment and i do see one hand raised. jeremy. please go ahead. >> hi. can you hear me? >> yes. welcome. you have three minutes. >> hello. can you hear me? >> yes we can hear you. can you hear us? >> i'm not able to hear anyone. >> okay. i can hear you. do you have head phones? . >> hello. >> hello. can you hear us now? alex can you -- >> hello. can you hear me? >> yes, we can hear you. can you send him a message in the chat that we can hear. >> there we g hi. jeremy from

[inaudible]. thank you for having the hearing today. it's helpful for me as well. we had a couple of adu projects and planning has been quite helpful all throughout despite the hiccups. my main question for natalia and the board -- i have two questions and commissioner swig you asked one and if we're taking away potential tenant space or open space or something in the rear yard and [inaudible] does it need to be replaced? what other means or methods might be affected? and the other question is going on commissioner swig's thoughts we find a lot of confusion in coordinating the planning department's view on all of these adus and those of the building departments and how applications are filed when they ask us

to reference certain supervisors legislative numbers or legislation and i would appreciate those could be somehow harmonized so those are my comments. >> okay. thank you. >> i can answer the question. >> yes. normally -- i just want to make a comment please. normally in public comment we don't create a dialogue and don't allow answers to questions, but in this case i would like to allow that we have this as a more of an open forum and questions maybe asked and planning maybe provide answers because we're here to get educated. thank you. >> thank you president swig. yes please ms. kwiatkowska if you could answer that? >> thank you. i will answer the first question first in regards to taking away open space. going through the state and hybrid program you're able to take away

open space when constructing an adu. however you're required to retain access to any open space so the square footage might get smaller but still have access. as i mentioned earlier we try to provide input to maximize the open space less than the lot or consider providing additional and then the other question or comment i hear you. we're trying to work at this time with the department of building inspection to harmonies the terminology and the names are explained and when [inaudible]. >> okay. thank you. is there any further public comment? please raise your hand. i don't see any further public comment so i want to thank the planning department very much for giving us this presentation this evening. thank you. so we will now move on to

the next item. this is item number 6, jurisdiction request number 22-zero seven and subject property at 524 lake street. letter from margaret and michael bloomfield, the requesters and asks board to take jurisdiction over the permit as cited which was issued august 2, 2022 and appeal ended on october 17 and filed -- auto permit holder is greg germano and remove old cabinets and replace with new and disposal and sink and back splash and counter outlets and hear from the representative for the requesters. welcome. he's the attorney. you have three minutes sir. >> thank you. my name is steve collier. i am the attorney for the requesters. they're in the room,

mr. and mrs. bloomfield and they will be addressing the appeal and that follows this item but as far as the request for jurisdiction i understand that the board is pretty limited in what it grant for jurisdiction. we believe you should in this case because the building permit what is not on the dbi's website when i looked at it on august 24 when i received notification from my clients there was a tremendous amount of demolition and construction going on and particularly on the 23rd. the tenants also complained to the housing inspector -- excuse me, the building inspector who told them work was being done beyond the scope of the permit, but they never told them what to do about that, whether they

could appeal, and importantly the permit is stated to be solely for a kitchen remodel when it became clear that the remodel was including all parts of of the apartment including a bathroom remold so i believe dbi should have stopped work on the permit and ordered that permit holder obtain a broader permit or amend the permit to include the bathroom and other areas that are being now worked on and were noticed in the pumping and electrical permits that were issued september 27. if they had done that and then we could have appeal that permit and then we wouldn't had an issue of an untimely appeal or opportunity to appeal simply because we didn't know who there was a permit issued. what the apparently happening that was work beyond the scope of any

permit or no permit at all and the requesters asked dbi to intervene and dbi it is we're beyond the scope of the permit so they thought the work would stop and it didn't and i believe it's within your jurisdiction to grant an appeal of the drawing permit. you have an appeal before you tonight -- >> 30 seconds. >> -- of the pumping and electrical permits so it's within the scope of what you're going to decide anyway and it seems logical to rule on all three permits. thank you. >> okay. thank you. we'll now hear from the permit holders representative. i believe is mr. alex serrano present. >> i think commissioner lemberg has a question. >> thank you. commissioner lemberg. >> yes, i wanted to check in is this permit issued is there no type of notification to the tenants as a matter

of course that would happen normally? i guess i just don't understand how this permit got filed, and the tenants in the building have no notice of it. >> right. unfortunately i think for just an interior remodel without any changing the envelope of the property or in smaller buildings there isn't a notification requirement or a posting requirement. there's certainly are in larger buildings, but in the three unit building with no change in the envelope i don't believe there is a posting requirement, but other people may know better than me or others. >> thank you. >> okay. thank you. we will now hear from the permit holders' representative. >> my name is alex

serrano. i am the general contractor. greg contacted me through his real estate agent they work for a long time to come and help out with this, and he actually pulled the permit already, so i came in help out and help to pull the electrical and plumbing permits, and you know take care of [inaudible] for the kitchen remodel. >> okay >> and everything is done, the permit fees, the is thes signatures for the pumping and the electrical and the permit was for 802 and not showing on the