>> good morning, everyone welcome to the monday february 6, 2023 meeting of the rules committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. i'm supervisor dorsey chair. i'm joined by acting vice chair aaron peskin and member safai. thank you to our clerk mr.

victor young and to jason at the sfgovtv team for staffing today's meeting. mr. clerk do you have announcements. >> yes the board are having hybrid meetings, providing remote access via telephone. first public comment taken on each item. for those in person, will be allowed to piaget first then those who are waiting on the phone line for those watching 26, 28, 78o 99 and sfgovtv the february is streaming it is 415-554-0001. enter access code: 2498 811 4462 ## you will hear the

meeting discussion but be mute exclude in listening mode only. when your item come up and public comment is called those in person should speak and those on the phone dial star 3. if you are on the phone remember to turn down your tv and other listening device. you we will take public comment those in person first then go to the remote line. you may submit comment in writing in the following ways. e mail them to niez at victorlet. young sfgovtv e mail will be forwarded to the supervisors and included as part of the file. you may sends it u.s. mail to city hall, 1 dr. carlton b. goodlett place room 224, san francisco, california. 94102. that completes my initial comments. >> thank you. before we start i like to say a

few words i want to thank peskin for entrusting mow to continue his work on rules. offer next 2 years. i want to express my appreciation and thanks to mandelman and connie chan for their work on this committee the past 2 years special how much i appreciate the opportunity to serve with the 2 colleagues and menldzs supervisor walt only be vice chair of the committee and supervisor safai. with whom i share priority and look forward to clan raiding. rules always has a lot to do today is no exception. let's get to t. mr. clerk. call item 1. i know you stated this but i want to note that supervisor peskin is in place of walton for today's meeting.

>> first, item 1. would you like me to read one and 2 together or separately? >> the motion appointing supervisor melgar ending june 30 of 23 as member to the association of bay area government executive board. >> thank you, mr. clerk thises continued from last week's meeting due to a last minute chink involving which supervisor would take this role the motion was amended say melgar will fill seat 3 on abag the association of bay area governments. neither of my colleagues for questions or comments i like to open up for public comments. >> i want to confirm we change today to seat 2. >> yes. one moment. members who wish to speak and

joining in person which lineup to speak along side of at this time. for those remote call 415-554-0001 enter access code: 2498 811 4462 ##. you need to press star 3 to enter the line. for those in the queue continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted that will be key to begin comments we have one person. you manipulate begin. >> hello. good morning. i'm michael patrellis. i need to gather my thoughts for a quick moment. this item is about supervisor melgar and her appointment to

the association of bay area government executive board. and um -- i want to speak to her qualifications. part of hai see her qualification is how she talks. during the commendation period on your tuesday meetings. that qualification of being able to talk and talk and talk during the commendations is a qualification. there is also the qualification that um during introductions for roll calls. she will talk, and talk and you know those of us in the public we wait and wait! and wait. and wait.

for supervisor melgar to finish talking. and that ability, that qualification of being able to talk, take up so much time every tuesday before we get to public comment, that is a qualification for why supervisor melgar should be appointed to this body. so -- i -- appreciate that you allowed me to gather my thoughts. i'm a bit intimidated by the 4 sheriffs you called out that's how it goes at city hall. yes, approve supervisor melgar for this body. thank you so much.

we can move to public comment on the phone line. first caller, please. good morning supervisor dorsey and safai and peskin, i believe. this morning. i am calling from san francisco tenant's union i'm a member and in support of supervisor melgar being an executive director on abag committee. i think she is well suited for the job. and i attended a number of the abag meetings and will be replacing gordon mar. yes, please, approve her. thank you. >> thank you. next caller, please.

good morning it is joe [inaudible] i'm calling to [inaudible] i want to advise supervisor melgar [inaudible] she is a [inaudible] a current [inaudible] a strong leader and someone who treats people with respect. and i don't find the first commenter respectful. i support law enforcement. i would be back and i hope you will paddle this nomination and think you know when i will be back. [laughter]. thanks. >> thank you. that was our last caller on the phone line. thank you, public comment on this is now closed. i'd like to make a motion to

sends item one to the full board with positive recommendations. a roll call. >> on that motion, supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor safai. >> aye. >> chair dorsey. >> aye. the motion passes without objection. thank you, mr. young. will go to the full board with positive recommendation. call the next item. >> item 2, motion reappointing supervisor stefani ending january 31 of 25 to the golden gate transportation board of directors. >> thank you, mr. clerk. seeing neither of my colleagues for questions or comments i like to open 2 to comment. >> yes. members of the public had wish to speak and are join nothing person can lineup to speak. for those listening remote call 415-554-0001, access code: 2498 811 4462 ## then star 3 to enter

the speaker's queue. for those in the queue wait null are unmuted then begin your comments. we have public commenter. at the podium you may begin your comment. >> yes. hello. good morning gaevenl michael patrellis. give me a moment to collect my thoughts the supervisors qualifications for this body. >> you know one qualifications the 8 of a supervisor to talk and talk and talk and continue talking during your tuesday meetings.

this supervisor talk and talk and talk and talk about commendations. the commendation time goes on and on and on. and talk on and on and on while we, the public patiently wait and wait and wait until we are allowed 120 seconds to speak. so the qualification i see every tuesday boy this supervisor to talk and talk and talk, will be a qualification on this new

body. i ask that you recognize how she will talk and talk and talk during commend agszs and roll call introductions while we, the public patient low wait for 120 seconds to address you. please approve this nomination. thank you. >> okay. we will check to see if anyone is on the phone line. >> can we have our first public commenter from the public comment line. >> good morning, supervisors [inaudible]. this is joe. [inaudible]. yes, the supervisor stefani fan she is [inaudible] [audio muffled] [muffled audio] [cannot

understand speaker]

>> thank you. next caller, please. >> can you hear me now? >> yes. >> great. david pilpel, good morning. so i attend most meetings of the bridge district. supervisor stefani has been a good member of the bridge board i support her reappointment. i think it is good to reappointment members who are familiar with busied. i think tell be grit to have all of the san francisco seats on the bridge board filled. i think it is best to have the members be fully engaged and represent the city on the bridge board.

and just finally, i would encourage supervisor peskin to look at both items 2 and 3 online 12. i would suggest that they can be core litted item 3 has either an extra word or couple words missing and item 2 could insert to the district secretary of the -- prior to the bridge district reference online 12 this is the optional. either way i support the reappointment of supervisor stefani. thank you for listening. >> okay. that was our last public commenter on the phone line. >> public comment on item 2 is closed. i like to make a motion to send to the full board with period recommendations.

>> yes. okay. on that motion, supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor safai. >> aye. >> chair dorsey. >> aye. yoot motion passes. >> item 2 will go to the full board with positive recommendation. call the next item >> item low a motion reappointing supervisor dorse term ending january 31 of 25 to the golden gate bridge highway and transportation district. >> mr. clerk i will make a motion to recuse supervisor dorsey from this vote. >> yes, on that motion. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor safai. >> aye.

>> chair dorsey excused. >> supervisor dorse serecused and i note because well is a small stipend that come with this position this is the reason for the recusal. and with that is there any public comment on item 3? >> members who wish to speak and are in person lineup at this time. for those remote, call 415-554-0001, access code: 2498 811 4462 ## then press star 3 to enter the speaker's queue. for those in the queue continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted then begin your comment. >> you may begin your public comment. >> thank you. >> good morning again. i'm michael patrellis i'm not

sure if i'm allowed say supervisor's name. as you know your tuesday meetings you restrict our first amendment rights. and you don't allow members of the public to say a supervisor's name. this restriction on our first amendment right i hope one day will be addressed. this person this supervisor who you want to appoint is a cop. and i think a cop would be good on this body. i would like to note that some of the qualifications of this cop are he can talk and talk and talk and talk will. douching during commendations

and the ability to keep on talking during roll call introductions and he will talk and talk and talk and talk during roll call introductions. that ability every tuesday to talk during those 2 items, as we, the taxpayers, we wait and we wait. and we wait and we wait. for our 120 seconds that you allow for each member of the public to speak. if that is not a qualification to speak on and on during tuesday meetings and yawn during public comment, i don't know what is. please approve this cop for that

panel. thank you. >> thank you. move on to the comment phone line. >> that line was unattended the next line. great. david pilpel againful supervisor dorsey has attends his first meeting of the bridge district board i'm confident he will represent us well. you heard my comments about item 2, justmented to again point out line 12 if you are using the language from item 2 then i think the correct language for line 12 should be transmit

certified copies here of, to the golden bridge transportation district so the 2 motions conform. i support the reappointment supervisor dorse tote bridge district board. >> thank you. >> next caller. okay. that was our left caller the line was unattended we can close public comment. where public comment for item low is closed. and i want to thank supervisor dorse for his wellingness to continue it serve on the golden gate bridge highway and transportation district. and also acknowledge that for the first time we have a full san francisco compliment on that

board that consists of representatives all the way to del norte county on the oregon boarder. il say for the record that if our colleague supervisor dorsey was a post certified member of the police force will be paid more than if he was a supervisor i will sends that to the full board with a positive recommendation on that motion a roll call, please. >> on that motion supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor safai. >> aye. >> chair dorsey excused the motion passes without objection. >> next item >> next is the ordinance amending the code and business and tax regulation code by prop c adopted on novemberit of 22 proviedz the homelessness oversight commission appoint all members. board the coordinating

board duties to serve the body required participate in federal condition continuum of care and that shelter monitoring advise the commission in lieu of the coordinate board and our city our home committee advise and recommend to the commission and the health commission and oversight commission form the department of homelessness and supportive housing strategic planning process. i like to note there is a request this matter referred out as a committee report. >> thank you. mr. clerk. supervisor safai will present. the floor is yours. >> thank you. i think we have a little power point. >> yes. one moment our staff, is will bring that up.

a simple power point. th past november 58% of the voters of san francisco supported prop c. focus of that was to establish greater acounsel abltd and oversight for homeless service deliver in san francisco when this department was created the budget was a little over 100 million temperature has grown to just south of 700 million dollars. and so the idea of this the purpose of this and the idea behind creating prop c was more ash countability and oversight and control and understanding of how the dollars and the department and direction were going to take. new commission set homeless policy in a public

forum. the controller will construct audits of homeless service. the big things we heard over the last couple years. people were frustrated about money spent and understand

understanding how it is implementd and used and are the dollars used wisely. an audit of the homeless service delivery in the city. both city deliver exclude nonprofit. as we saw when the patroller did conduct a more recent audit of the homeless service delivery nonprofits there was very concerning information that was cert falsed. and now that agency is being investigated and people are questioning how shelters are handed out and administered and the over all healing of that agency. this is one example. the other thing was to the other purpose of the proposition was to stream line the add rise real bodies. there are a number that are in existing in our city our home. shelter monitor committee and others. so this is to improve the efficiency and reduce conflict. so -- in prop c, there are requirements that we created as part of this ordinance and the second helpful we are going to duplicate the file some amendments were not ready today and want to ensure that members have the opportunity to review them. prop c required an ordinance and that's when we are doing today. focusing the homeless board on the continuum of care and makes clear the commission appoints its members. ensure the shelter monitor

committee will advise the commission on shelter commission and establishes our city our home as a body that makes recommendations to the commission. on the budget and strategic planning processes. in the past, a couple years they have gone through a budgeting recommendation process has not always alined with the departments budget process but this allows for that opportunity for them for both processes to lineup. that's it, colleagues. i know we have emily here today. and emily, du want to say anything or you are comments or concerns? okay. before we vote i'd like to duplicate the file so that we can come back with the additional amendments and conversation that we had working with the city attorney they were not prepared today after internal review. so we will have them ready i'd

like to continue the duplicated file for a week. do i need a separate motion. >> you don't need a motion on request to duplicate. duplicate but to continue the duplicated file y. we need a motion on the request to continue for a week to february 13th. >> after public comment, correct in or do this before public comment. after public comment. why great. >> all right. that's it and if there are questions i'm happy to take them. if not go to public comment. >> no colleagues for discussion, let's open this up to public comment. >> yes. excuse me. members of the public who wish to speak and join nothing person lineup at this time of for those remote call 415-554-0001, access code: 2498 811 4462 ## then star 3 to enter the queue.

we have a person in the room you may begin y. hello and good morning again. i'm still michael patrellis and intimidated by the cop sitting behind me. i will still address this boulevard as best i can despite the intimidation of law enforcement behind me. i'm in favor of this homeless body. we have needed it for a long time. i believe that there will be many good things to come out of this homeless oversight body. i think it should have happened

sooner. i don't think it should have taken a ballot front get us this body. i think if there was less time devoted at your tuesday meetings to commendations and roll call introductions where you have no time limits to talk on and on and on, if you would curb yourself every tuesday with the commendations and the roll call introductions that take up i good amount of your time every tuesday and instead devote the time to solving some homeless issues, and to setting up upon the homeless panel? if you would to do that, i think your 12% approval rating would

rise. i think you need to be reminded that the chronicle found this body of supervisors has only a 12% approval rating. and it is because of things your inability to set up an oversight committee about homelessness as a reason why. thank you. >> thank you. >> can we move on to our first phone caller? no audio.... that was unattended line we will move on. >> good morning, supervisors and general public i'm dale semore i have been involved in homeless issues for year its it is my passion. you other than who i am, i

served on the local homeless [inaudible] 6-8 years. one thing i can brag binever made an oversight recommendation. we have been the oversight. i never made a recommendation on political intrefrns or social interference. i felt like i represented the community. people who are on the streets. people in the tents. i represent tyrone and sheila who are on elis street now. and i have been concerned the oversight committee might be politically connected. with loyalties and favorites have to be given back exit want you all to assure the public and the city tell not be a commission that is tied to political agenda. and -- that mark for identification y'all know i have been on both sides of this

issue. i'm support thanksgiving issue but gotta be where the people on the board represent the community and the people on the street. represent the [inaudible] that have worked hard to keep the homelessness where it is. yes we have problems in our nonprofit organizations not being up to speed on a lot of issues that legal issues but 99% of the nonprofits work hard as hell. to get people off our streets. exit don't want this to be an organization that will be a hit squad for the people that are working hard every day who are -- i'm talking about bots on the streets. this please keep that in minds i know you are coming back next week to taylor the document. >> our time elapsed. thank you. >> are there additional

callers? >> that last caller we have one unattended caller who was not responding. and that was our last caller weave can close public meants at this time. >> thank you, mr. young. public comment on 4 is closed. supervisor safai. >> i make a few more comments to clarify for the record. we had to go to the ballot to create a charter commission that is required. we cannot dom that.

that was the reason why we went for the ballot and put in the ballot measure that the controller for the first time would audit on a regular and manualed torrey basis. and then the other things we put in were required boy follow up ordinance we split it in 2 part its it is a good balanceful i will say that one of the purpose system there are district bodies and the idea was to consolidate and stream line the bodies in working with the commission. the commission recommendations will be coming through this body as well. we had the application process open. they have been submitted we'll make decisions to appoint on behalf of the board of supervisors the mayor and i have communities and she conveyed she intendsed have her

recommendation and put her names forward soonful most likely in the next week or so. so -- we are on target to have the body and the recommendations happening around march first that infent of them to be appointed by with the first meetings to begin may first. so, just wanted clarify that. but i like to make a motion to continue the duplicated file for a week to the next meeting if that is okay? >> thank you, mr. clerk. roll call on that motion yoochl yes, du want to discuss when we'll do with the african-american or. after we continue the duplicated. >> on the motion to continue the duplicated matter, to february 13th 23. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor safai. >> aye. >> chair dorsey. >> aye. >> that motion passes without

objection. >> thank you, mr. clerk. >> i'd like to send the original am item with positive recommendation to the full board yoochlt on this motion to send the original version as a committee report. on that motion supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor safai. >> aye. >> chair dorsey. >> aye. >> is that motion passes without objection. thank you, mr. clerk call yack 5. >> item 5 a motion discongress remote participation by members at the board and committees for reasons related covid-19 and discontinuing remote public comments by the public at meetings. board and committees sept required to enable people with dablt disabilities to

participate >> as we prepare for the end of the covid-19 public health emergency orders we are decisions to make what returning to normal and the new normal entails. one of those decisions involves the future of remote participation and public comment and hathat will look like. my members as well as rafael mandelman have serve instead their roles longer than i have and were serving on this board and in various committees before the covid emergency i'm looking forward to hearing perspectives and the public we serve. many who have expressed their opinions on this topic and with that i like to westbound supervisor mandelman top present on his motion. floor is yours. >> thank you, chair dorsey and colleagues for hearing this motion. this motion has been rattling

around in city hall for quite some time. board came back in spring of last year to in person meetings. the health officer indoor masking for public setting and april of 22 left the remainlieder indoor masks. and almost from that point, i think a number of us questioned whether this body and the public are well served by unlimited remote public comment. >> i pledgeed introduce a repeal of unlimited remote comment i think overnight spring or summer. colleagues kept getting sick. and actually needing to aveil themselves of the provisions of the state emergency order that suspend the requirements for us to mote in person and for as

long as that was going on, we were thinking we should hold back we introduced this motion in september. and again have somewhat delay third degree on going folks needed to take advantage and members of the body have needed to take advantage for remote participation by board members. at any rate now we kinds of have to do something. the govern covid-19 emergency declaration endos february 28 the mayor circulated a memo rescind our local emergency orders on march first the board of prierzs with other commissions, board and policy bodies will once again by charter be required to meet in person. so, i am proposing what is reflect immediate this motion which is subject to discussion

by this body and the board and committee and the board, is that we go back to the future but go back to a better future. that is the motion would provide for continued remote public comment but only as necessary to enable the participation of folks with disabilities they make it practical to participate in person this is a significant but. although there were the ad a was the law in prior to 2020, we discovered during the pandemic we can make it easier for folks seeking accommendation to participate. i think we are all committed to making sure we continue to do that. buoy would argue that allowing for unlimited remote public ment as we have had including callers no relationship to san francisco, come at a cost.

both in terms of resources but in terms of our ability to conduct our business effective. there are lots of examples of this from the last couple of years. a couple that come to minds are the hour and hours and hours and hours of people yelling at each other through the car free jfk, i don't imagine the 1 minute expressions on either direction over any of the dozens of hours that were spent necessary low moved a single member of this board sitting as the board or transportation authority but did ensure the day we made the decision the other would like of the board did not begin until 9 at night. and i don't think that leads to good dlksz. good decisionmaking. i think it it is bad for the public not to mention the cost

not just in terms of our time and staff time but of city resource this is get spent on those long meetings. another example that come to my minds the commission the redistricting commission. now there are lots with criticisms of how the redistricting commission went down. but had i took from it and i was not. watching them myself but the notion that the poor volunteers were spending hours and hours and hours listening to other people talking about hashould happen with redistricting and only beginning to consider their own actions in the we hours of the morning when their thought thinking was not the best. and when the public the broader public not the public this come in the public interested in seeing that is happening before they go to sleep or whatever. would not have seen or observed had was going on.

i think there is an example from the board and from commission lands. about how this playings out. the notion also of public comment, i think, and i had questions about this in prepandemic in person comment who is the public getting reflected in the presentations to the board in it is not the views of the broad public that most of the time does not participate. it is tillically folks organized around an issue and focused and may not represent the majority sentiment around that issue they care enough they will show up in person or call in. i don't know that expanding that participation of that group without bring nothing perspectives leads us close to capturing the will of the public. i have been clear my feelings are. i think we have the obligations this we have under the brown act

and sunshine ordinance. and american with disabilities i don't think we should seek out additional opportunity for comment beyond that. whatever the board decides there are of course a lot of outstanding implementation questions regarding reasonable accommendations that have to get worked out over this month. and that we may need to continue to work on after march first. the mayor's office on disability's act working with the clerk of the board and the city add administrator and department to finalize guidance and deliver options for reasonable accommodations for individual hos cannot provide in person comment but this it is a separate question from the policy question the committee has before it today. any rate, we are a motion can you do hayou will or forward it without recommendation or whatever the will of the

committee. i made clear hay think my recommendation for this committee would be. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor mandelman. i see colleagues. president peskin. >> thank you, chair dorsey and. >> i then and there thinking a lot about this motion and also about where we have been for the last 3 years. i want to start by public low thanking and acknowledging the clerk of the board of supervisors. and her staff. as well as count believability -- individuals who are commission secretaries. and all of the folks at sfgovtv. it has been a monumental under

taking to over night switch from the old system of 3 years ago in the face of the pandemic. to allow the workings of government at the board of supervisors at the committees, at over 100 brown act bodies. commissions advisory mittees. you name it. and i want to take this moment to say it has been impressive. the technology existed although we did not know how to use it and perfect it. but that cat is out of the bag. and there is no going back. that technology exists we have prouven we can use it. and i also hear the comments of

the around what supervisor mandelman is suggest. i want our government to work efficient low. all of the work we do is public work and needs to be informed by the public. i understand that. and we want to encourage public participation. and i understand that. i'm trying to look for and may be this is an impossibility a balance of of making sure that we hear this comment. whether it is through modium that barely existed when i started which was e mail, medium that did in the exist when i started which was social media. and of course, believe be comment at meetings i want to fwhans with the efficiency of getting stuff done. i hear had supervisor mandelman says when you have 6 hours of

public ment and say the same thing and i get it there is passion, for or against closing jfk or the great highway. did it influence thinking? i have been at public ment somebody suggested something or shown a view i never thought about before. i have gone does not happen often but go to meetings thinking i had my minds made up and a member swayed mow to look differentsly that is invaluable. but i'm trying to look for balance. and noting that this technological reality is common place. we have zoom meeting in bedrooms, and what supervisor mandelman said is not lost, 3 weeks ago i came down with a case of corid and could not

participate in person at the meeting i was just elected to chair. and last week that happened another colleague. covid as we know is still here and very prevalent. and one of the things that i was thinking about and may be this does or does in the reach that point of balance. words this are in the motion that supervisor mandelman has proposed. i direct you to page 3 of the left paragraph. which goes back to the old way. the old way for public accommodations was that a request had to be submitted 72 hours in advance. and i think given the technology and our experience over the last

3 years that does not seem reasonable. to me. and i think a matter of law, people could request that. as a starting point of a complex public policy discussion suggest that be changed. and that be changed to manage like i will 3 this out for my colleagues to think about today and after today. >> strike that 72 hours in advance replace it with, prior to the start of the meeting. which i understands from staff is something that they could work with and we do it in real time every day. that's a starting points. i want to say that it is very

important given this you have in the legislative branch we get to contemplay and set fort ouron rules. actualized. we have to have that trailing legislation which supervisor mandelman is aware of. i also think it is important that all of the brown act bodies not just in the legislative branch of government. be on the same page. we should not have 2 systems wourndz executive branch commissions and a differents for the board of supervisors. and to that ends i reached on the to the executive branch. and it would appear i don't want to put word in the mayor's mouth, that well is a shared

desire for whatever we do to be uniform and apply to all commissions and the board of supervisors. i wanted to set that forward. there are other wording changes i could quibble with. i read the amendments that supervisor mandelman's staff passed this morning addressing many of them but not all of them. they are relatively small and word smithy in nature. i will stop talking and hundred is over to my colleagues. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. vice chair and i see supervisor mandelman on the roster. >> i wanted let folks know i brought hard copies that remember circulated i will make sure everybody has them.

>> thanks. i had a quick question through the chair the last comment about not putting words in the executive's mouth but that there be a shared desire to have a uniform policy is that something the executive branch how do they do that. can you expand on that? >> i would defer to department city attorney pierson as to that the powers. i assume under chapter 3 of the charter that is within the mayor's purvow to set forth all executive branch brown act bodies. madam city attorney. >> i have to look to see whether it is in the mayor's powerhouse i agree with supervisor peskin it seems likely. most body vs their rules that

layout rowels for public meant. each body may need to revise its by laws or rules governing public comments. >> okay. >> thank you. >>il say i agree. there should be a shared and uniform policy throughout the city, i appreciate the work that supervisor mandelman has done. i know it has in the been easy. i agree the example i use was being here felt like 24 hours but when we were here and asked to stay through christmas eve last year. and it was not until approximate probably i think shy of 2 in the morning this we finished our meeting.

had to do with the tenderloin emergency and all valuable input all valuable public comment but -- a lot of that had to do with the emergency under when we were dealing with a public health crisis that crisis has evolved back to a manageable state. and as supervisor peskin said the technology allowed for us to be more accommodating with people with disabilities. i liked the conversation around moving the 72 hour notice. i think that is helpful example i don't know if supervisor mandelmanmented go over his amendments. did you need to talk or they are just? straightforward. supervisor mandelman. [inaudible] >> changes that occurred the pass of time since we introduced the motion. it sort of recounts of the

governor's declaration of emergency would be ending. and then the mayor's announce am shield terminate her emergency order in another recital and then lines up the date which the orders will not be in affect that is march first. that's it >> thank you. >> thank you, supervisor mandelman. i like to add to express appreciation to supervisor mandelman for work on this. and to my colleagues for their thoughtful comments. i will say if only us as supervisors the analysisless be different and inclineed not have

limitations. we should human we sign up for and public comment is something this does not take place just in this build and within the scope of this meeting. public comment is had i expect when i go to the coffee shop and meet with mail and messages and people ask for meetings. the reality this is not just us 11 members of the board of supervisors it is staff and in large measure it is people who are volunteers for commissions and task forces and bodies. don't get sam rows we get it takes a toll on them. the other thing i have to acknowledge, i heard from my residentses and i represent a district that has a lot of

businesses in the downtown area. that -- you know they feel when we will tell businesses especially the big ones to come back to the office it is is time to come become to work that the city should put more skin in the game as well. this is something that small businesses are counting on. and i guess the closing with as a supervisor i do want to communicate that to hai said about public ment something this is part of our job all the time. that goes for people in my district if there is a reason you want to meet with me or express your public comment or invite me to a group in district 6 e mail me. that is part of my job. i appreciate everybody's work on this. do we have a motion.

>> i'm sorry my apologies. rookie mistake. with that i'd like to open up to public comment. >> yes. members of public who wish to peek and joining person lineup at this time. for those remote call 415-554-0001, access code: 2498 811 4462 ## then star 3 to enter the speaker's queue. ton wait untilure have been unmuted that will be your queue to begin your comment. if there is anybody in the room hold like to speak lineup at this time. we have 38 people on the phone line with 25 in line to speak. is there anybody in the chamber

to provide public comment at this time. line up to speak. step up. >> thank you. why hello supervisors. as you see for me and my wheel chair to give public ment even getting the microphone down wondering who doll it one of those anowing thing in my day a deal with ablism constantly every minute of every day. not every minute. mull pull times a day and these things accumulate and add stress. i want to point that out sometimes people say you know what, i want to stay home and not deal with things like that. and should have the right to do that. that's where we need you to hear us who have the experiences to try to recognize that if it it is an experience you don't have, we need you to hear us about had

it is like. that's not the testimony i was going to give. i'm jessica with senior and disability action. we have a coalition of lbgtq+ organizations, racial equity groups. neighborhood groups. parent and others coming together around protecting remote access. democracy is about the need to hear from marginalized groups not just people with disabilities. a policy is in the the a. tell not help people who don't identify as disabled or someone who is a parent or at work or machine in the bay rue who can't take an hour and a half to get here and wait not knowing when their item will come up. morph it requires people toium through another hoop of paying attention to time and calling ahead t. is a burden on disabled people temperature is a risk. i am at risk if i get covid of dying. and i took that risk today but

not lately. i question whether that was a good idea. people should not be required to have to a sthaesz risk and put their lives at risk. we had not further segregate people by saying here is the pol you do if you have a disability. here is hayou do if you are not. talk about. time e lapsed. normal does not work, thank you. >> hello michael patrellis again. your meetings go on and and on and on because you all talk xhurg commendation and roll call without a time limit. you are worried about spending too much time listen to us, put a time limit on yourself.

the other thing is had um -- you disrespect the public. by putting public comment at the end of the meeting. we are to sit here through hours and hours of your hot air. to get 120 seconds of public comment. i have lectured you about how the oakland city council puts public comment as item 1. item 1. respects the public. had you put public meant at item 59, or item 74. you are disrespecting us. you all paid 140-150,000 a year. a 6 figure saul row is not enough for you to sit here and put public comment at the top of the agenda. get another job.

if you don't want to listen to us. you do not hold ton hall meeting. i in and said over and over again we need a town hall in the castro about a number of issues and never got the town hall. it is not okay to want disabled people working people any member of the public to slep here ever tuesday and sit around for hours. as you talk, talk, talk, talk. about commendation and roll call introductions. stop disrespecting the partial kill this motion. thank you very much, the pandemic is not over and that is why i'm wearing a mask. keep remote public comment. we need it. >> good morning. i'm curtis bradford the manager

at tenderloin development corporation. and i'm speaking because i think if is important this we keep public comment accessible for all of our residents. there are folks who don't identify as disabled, folks like myself who are at increased risk. the pan dem sick in the over i'm increased risk because of distressed immune system i am here but there are other folk who is are in similar situations who need access in a safe way. there is working families, mothers a lot of people are seniors and it it is difficult for thome get here. are we account for them through accessibility clause? i guess official low you would we then and there is going to ecclude people. i know it is hard on controversial issues to sit here

for xhours hear it all temperature is heard and tire and difficult. but it is also really important. it is important this people get a chance to have their voice heard even if someone said the same thing who decides which person you hear and which you don't. upper should have a moment to share their voice. it is [inaudible]. you should be receptive to hearing the message. and that's had a democracy is about and we need to protect that i continue is hard work and long hours and difficult. i sat through those. it is important people need to be heard.

thank you. upon anyone else in the chamber? we will move to the public comment line. first caller, please. >> good morning. supervisors and members of the admissible who in in person this is julie fish frer district one. i wish i had more time to speak i will use hai have to my best ability. i'm calling from my home. my companionanrism survivor is here. we would in the be able to participate without this remote access. we are high risk as many are. corid is not over. colds are not over, flu is not

over and all of us and all of you need to keep that in minds. public access is had we have had we are not voting. voting is great. each person gets to vote. being able to speak and having a royce with you there as city hall through technology, through sfgovtv and web ex allows us to anticipate and hear you. i ask that you not only keep and expand remote access in san francisco at any hour of the day or night we need to be connected. thank you. next speaker, please. >> eileen coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. speaking on my own behalf. in opposition to this legislation. to follow up on my written comments there is no bla report

on this item. the main rational seems to be on pages 4 lines 1 and 2 and quote, the significant cost associated allowing the public to payment in board meetings remote. the significant costs have never been quantityified the burden of the public to go in to city hall, sitting to give 2 minutes of public comment and returning from city hall have not been factored in. i also sat through 97% of the very, very long redistricting meetings. i have a library card. it entitles me to use library resources. i urge the board to issue call in cards which have been vetted rather than e eliminate public comment except for disables i oppose this legislation as

drafted. next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors. this is patrick shaw. having trouble with my speesh following my cancer surge row. i remind frumy written testimony that? 1996, the board adopted resolution 270-96 and then mayor brown signed in law the policy of the board of supervisors of the city and county of san francisco. but call in system developed to take public comments. so supervisor mandelman is proposing to do is to change

near low 3 decades of standing city policy. i heard supervisor peskin's concern about having a uniform policy that would apply to the legislatives and the executive branches. but the solution is to not to restrict board of spierzs comments and public comments just to accommodate the administrative side of our government. this resolution is. simple low in search of a real problem. the last speak indicated. as to mr. patrellis i commend him for his time. mandelmanments to public to drop

dead. mr. patrellis was correct everyone of you supervisors made 149 thousand. >> time e lapsed. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good upon morning. supervisors. jake process on behalf of the urban action coalition. calling in remote, which should give you an indication of our organization's feeling on this. we found that expanding access to remote call in gives a representatived sample size of the city's residents approximate feedback on various policies. . not specific low housing but in our experience focused on housing. i think this the idea we make

exceptions for people who identify as disabled, but don't make in the logic does not make sense huare not including folk who is can't take a day off in the day to come to the board or a committee or commission. and we understand this some can't make it because of disabilities but others can't make it for other reasons as well. so, keeping remote comments available for everyone is essential. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon will george, coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. i wanted to say that i prefer having the 8 to listen to

meetings it allows me to listen to the meetings while multitasking. as others have said, it is difficult to get downtown. ing worth it to sit through meetings and [inaudible] [inaudible]. who sometimes call themselves supervisors, and it is plain hard. and this is unreliable had a meeting will be heard. and -- how long public comment is going to be. yes is a problem because this is instead 20 in the sometimes you get 40 all saying the same

thing. i understands but it is your job. now i'm in a wheel chair, so it is difficult for me, paratransit is unreliable. takes mow half a day and -- they come upon at certain specific times i may get downtown and have to leave. to get back to get a ride back may take 2 hours. i'm only half an hour from my house. so -- um -- i want to say i'm a little disappointed supervisor mandelman. your time elapsed. like to apol yoiz for cutting people off we have 2 machines per speaker for this matter.

next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors [inaudible] in district 6 stands with senior and disability action and 100 community organizations in opposition to the motion. unfortunately the pandemic is far from over and people had not have to choose between health and participation in government and takes away voices of parents, working people who had a voice the past few years. raise questions hol be eligible to receive an accommendation and the enforcement might be. to be honest, i [inaudible] the dog and pony show for public comment feeling our side needs to turn out hours of supporters merely because we know they will do the sameful because of this i'm open not idea that for contentious issues there are newer and less cost low and time

consuming ways to facilitate participation in government and making more representative. other cities experimented with moss, should have a system in place before we eliminate this and revert to the unequal system we had before we had be honest about the affects of the motion. we an if people jump through more that's participate in government thoou fewer will participate ask meetings will be faster. i like to see a solution that makes a gentleman representative. i have no doubt we can finds a better way but we had nag out first. >> the end of the motion says that remote public comment should be aftered people with disabilities to the extent required by law. i think we had do more to accommodate people with disabilities and everyone who

wants to participate in our government. rather than saying that are standard is to comply with the law. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good morning mixture, wes low senior policy member for glide opposition to the motion. discontinuing remote public comment for everyone except for people with disabilities would be unacceptable obstacle to communal participation and democracy. and systemic marginalation, discounting the responsibles of constate wents remote comment knead possible for members to participate for the first time. and should be aloud rather than oldsmobile as an asdomidation government should want more participation not less and promote inclusion and remove barriers to acsids. working people. parents and seniors and all that

are reasons that make it difficult on come to city hall in the middle of the week dame work, transportation, childcare, and risk of exposure to covid-19. glide serves many of the populations and difficult for thome dmaul for public but near low impossible for them on come in person. we serve people impact the by the legal system who feel intimidate head law enforcement is present. glide works with survivors of domestic violence they deserve a safe way to engage. during times we need increase connections ending remote commends would widen the divisibility. we request a no vote on this. thank you. >> good morning i'm [inaudible] from district 9.

and [inaudible] calling this morning to remind you that remote participation should be allowed for all. reasonable accommendation and requiring people to identify as disabled and ask ahead of time, as a bear year to make it less likely for people to payment. you know happen is next? il ask you. are you also going to limit or prevenn people from voting by mail or voting [inaudible] from other county and state. increase public engagement should be celebrated not prevented this body has a power to shape our policies and should include everyone in the process. long showers decisions left a

long wachl much longer than that. and the people affected by your decisions should have a say. so. please, consider that. and vote no for this. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning! board of supervisors rules committee! i'm susan lander. i'm stand nothing front of history class 471. which is legal and constitutional history. give us a shout, class. >> i'm here to talk about free speech and accommendation. now me and my students we work and we learn. during business hours. that's a fact of life. most people in the audience live and work learn and work during

business hours. so why would you want to cut off our upon opportunity to testify before the board of supervisors. i use to be city college. supervisors, dorsey, congratulations on your chairship. supervisor safai. hey >> supervisor peskin, good to talk to you. supervisor mandelman not liking this. resolution. so. i will make this short i have to go back to talking about the 14th amendment. i urge you to keep public testimony accessible as possible. do i have a witness! thank you will rules committee, board supervisors. >> i'm done. >> thank you.

next speaker, please. >> hello supervisors. i'm sheba [inaudible] a district sick resident and public policy manager at home rise. i'm calling to urge you to reconsider the decision to ends remote public comments. our community comprised of people with disabilities physical and mentalal. seniors, working parents and individual hos cannot dedicate a day to the chambers give a 1-2 minute comment. eliminating remote comments you erase the quality of life barriers many face seek opportunity where they can participate in civic engagement. don't generalize the needs of a few over the major by making a decision that will impact the public's perception of had happens in the chambers. it is rivered by law virtual

comment provided to the public if and when others call in remote. remote public comment cannot be an accommendation but necessary. allows public engagement fo to hold you accountable. keep remote comment. thank you. good morning i'm a district 8 resident and the race and equity in all planning opposed this legislation. i find it highwayly insulting. i'm a senior now. my voice counts i participated in meetings for forever.

with the board and find this cutting off our voices inwill suling. we had have more inclusivity and in public engagement. you should be able to 39 us. and absorb what we are saying, take it in and -- then rule accordingly. please, deny this, thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. hello i'm campbell. i'm here with the [inaudible] i'm 23 year old this is my first time call nothing. i'm at work now and i would not participate if not for this option. and i would appreciate if it

stayed. yes, thank you. >> next speaker, please. hello. do not accept this proposal, do not accept or forward it. this is a valand i had necessary way for people to participate in government affairs and decisionmaking. i'm vivian. it is in the just people with disabilities who choose to phone in. many people have schedules this precloud air trip to city hall. also people have different communication styles. some like to testify in person. some like to write. some like to phone in. the factors should not eliminate participation. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please.

>> hellingo. i'm alisa i'm a member of upon senior and disability action. looking at your meeting on screen today i see that even basic covid safety protocols are not followed at city hall. no one is masking. there is no social distancing. only supervisors have dedicated microphones the public shares a mic without any cleaning protocols in between. this last point is directed at supervisor mandelman. i'm not a one issue person. remote access is not the only city issue i care about. i have contacted your office frequently about muni, support for 24th street merchantses during covid. i have yet to receive a

pregnancy from your office. i would like my voice to be included in this discussion. and i thank all the supervisors for listening to the many voices who are united against this proposal to end remote access. thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning this it is tad buckner and this proposed ordinance is very abrupt and harsh. the pan dem sick in the over. people are fear to feel show up publicly. and people are getting covid even taking precautions. in the short term is makes no sense. in the long-term the pandemic changed our lives forever. virtual is now a part of our reality and it is demonstrated

in years how many passionate san franciscans are engaged in their community. concerned about issues. and want to participate but because offions and taking care of loved ones and responsibilities than i have been restricted the phone. cutting this off is cutting off participation that has been demonstrated over and over. so, please issue don't support this ordinance. nothing i know can replace in person i have done my share in person at city hall but people who can only call in have the right. please, make sure it continuous. thank you very much. thank you. next speaker, please.

thank you. next speaker, please. hello i'm dan terrell the secretary of the [inaudible] association a tenant's association of the [inaudible] building in the mission district. it is directly labor which has many meetings over the years and now is home to -- many organizations representatives working people of color, mostly. in the mission and surrounding areas. i'm shocked that i expect to hear an argument that les democracy is better than more i

and that from mitch mcconnell but for the board of supervisor its is surprising to me to say the least. and people cannot get paid days off to go to the meetings to public hearings. and hours go by and also hahas been said is lately that covid [inaudible] i myself don't want to finds out how long covid [inaudible] my blood disease. one way masking would be dodgey at best. and lastly. [inaudible] [inaudible] but to hear complaintses how long the meetings go on, seems i think

[inaudible] not working as volunteers. affecting the work you do and expect [inaudible] [audio muffled]. next speaker, please. hello i'm a board member of walk san francisco. i left my full time job last among to be engaged. i can't be in person today my child does not have school. access is so important. all the people with disabilities and scheduling and hanot. i understand that stream lining the processes will allow the

city to deliver more and not get caught up in hearings and staff time consumed boy that. i'm asking is there another way echoing others that brought this up a way to have public comment with state and federal comment, go to the the website or drop down menu. write in my comments. i know my voice is heard and it is convenient. i don't hear anyone saying they like waiting on a phone queue for hours either i hope well is another way that can provide accessibility and gather information in a way this is useful for you to gauge. i than on line and writing is not a medium that works well for everyone. men a phone line option. could be ways to meet the needs

which i see you trying hard to bridge between. thank you. appreciate it. next speaker, please. >> hello this is citizen 22. i wonder if you remember me. >> now had i lived in noe valley i was not very political. my environment never required it. boy, do i miss those days. then i lived in district 6. had i reached out to matt hene, i do not mean to violate protocol. hoe is no longer a supervisor i will be frank, it did nothing. i only felt i had a place to

ends democracy once i had a right to call in and payment. in the board of supervisor meetings. i found my voice. i found my power. and i know i reached other people. and some of you. please, do not remove my ability to reach not only some of you, but the other people listening. i found democracy. alive, vibrant, vivid and inspiring. through all of you and around [inaudible]. that was never acceptable to me before am democracy, [laughter] it is so beautiful exit never had access to it prior to this

particular medium. sometimes, i would be ill, and i would in the wake up until helpful way through the moout meet and call in feeling unable to speak but hear all of you, your voices. >> speaker time, and you would -- thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning daved pilpel. as supervisor peskin noted many behind the scenes work every day to make the meetings work. i see clerk in chambers today perhaps we will hear prosecute her after comment i bit about that. you have heard from a variety of people today had don't always agree on things sept about this issue a lot of eloquent speakers. public comment can be useful,

useless or in between. i think we have seen today. i tried to be useful in my comments policy bodies can limit comment in my opinion there is no need for long meeting remote comment increased public engage am in gentleman the past 3 years. i support keeping remote comment. i oppose the motion as currently drafted. i'm happy to discuss ways to minimize costs and make meetings effective and efficient. i continue to be mindful about time and issues of meaningful representative gentleman. i urge to you discuss ways to make public comment work and continue this item today. and finally i think supervisor mandelman is not completely wrong on elements whf he said at the beginning i think there is a comp moiz to be found here and hope we can work together to make that happen.

thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. hello i'm a retired emotional city college and leader of concerned residents of sunset. kudo to the wonderful teach here phone in the with her class model being for them civic engagement. i'm disabled and would not be able to participate because i am not able to come. there are working people and small children. seniors. people who don't have the transportation to get to the meetings. this is i core value of the civil right's movement. equal access. equal access is what democracy is about.

please vote no on this issue. i understand where receiveiel mandelman is coming if. i sat through meetings that were 8 hours long and we need to go after the abusers of the process. it is like the teach here makes the entire class serve detention because one kid was screwing up and acting out. that's had this reminds me of. it is in the fair. it is in the just. go after groups like the bike coalition i sat through meeting the bike coalition gets by the way they are funds by the taxpayer. they have people call nothing from seattle, they are people calling in from los angeles. this it is an abuse of the system. go after the people had make

these meetings less [inaudible]. thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning members. this it is michael, great to see you all. and good morning. i'm calling to oppose this motion perform i'm here to advocate the rightos behalf of people with aids, working class, our marginalized and people without an a little to make it down to city hall to advocate for 3 words compelling public interests. 2 months ago i launched 18 corruption caucus to address these issues. ip want to see the city taking

on more shun shine not reducing it. people have a right it address and petition the government as approximate it is in the broken, it does not need to being fixed. i think that is we saw it in the pandemic we had a change footage a knit address the issues a bit different low. the idea is not to close acstoesz gentlemaneen fifty-two if wore passed haotherses what the board has now an opportunity to show real leadership this motion is not it. i ask this you oppose this motion. thank you very much. have a good day. thank you. next speaker, please. good morning i'm appalled you even considering this. this is a major city in the

united states, we are the northern siliconvilley but don't act like it. one city is going back opposing to go back in technology this is so ridiculous. sometimes come out with ridiculous measure this is is up there. now. one of the supervisors says i was up medical 2 in the morning. so was i and i don't get paid. i remember a few years ago we had to share on the -- up to the sun came out when i left city hall. that's not that big of a deal if you want to modify it come out and put a limit on public comments. 2 hours 2-1/2 or go back to instead of 120 seconds to 60 seconds you can't eliminate due proisz this archaic. how can you think about this?

what are you thinking in no, no, hell no! thank you. next speaker, please. >> i'm organize at super power media. it is offensive that public officials voted in the public using power to under mine the ability to give remote comment. you are ash countal to the public that includes to do everything in your capability to make it possible for torn make their voice heard on legislation that impacts them. people said before it is disrespectful to relegate comment to the end of meetings in the first place and we sit here and hear you debail whether disabled or working clasdz or seniors and poor folks to give

input is ridiculous. for so many it is the only way hay have their voice heard. i oppose this offensive legislation. it is important this you keep the ability to give public comment remotely and we are constantly told reel we live with billions prowsing technology. use that to work toward full accessibility instead of curtailing that. have backbone and decency to serve the people who elected you thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. this it is steve, it is contemptible we are spending tax dollars discussing huto shut down public comment for people on can't go to the meetings. when we look at who behind this? who is the supervisor put thanksgiving forward he is a lan

development lawyer has supported upon gentification and the billion airs taking over and destroying san francisco. and that's why he says we mead to cut down on habitual access. it it is antifree speech he did the same on the board of trustee in city college in san francisco. and limits the right of the students and each and staff to participate. we are talking about an attacker on free speech in san francisco who proclaims he is for the people but actions in pushing an attempt to shut down remote public ment is an dpachl of discrim nigz and example of the

gentifiyers who want to destroy democratic life in san francisco. if you are a developer. if you are a billion airhe will have time but with the people of san francisco who want to put voice out against subsequentification. next caller in >> hello i'm [inaudible] an organizer at senior and disability action calling to oppose mandelman's measure for

many reasons. many other speakers already eluded to. one is that corid is still a crisis and killing sick00 a day in the united states. and it is disabling many more and there are many people who are not able to go to city hall to comment because of it. because there is no mask requirement at city hall and as we see very few people in the room are wearing masks making unsafe for people who are high risk or anyone who cannot take weeks off of work or risk getting long covid and more. this policy toent remote public comment will hurt disabled people there it is not a compromise that will work. we tried to finds a way to limit the length of meetings and make sure people from outside the city are not calling it. we know of one case from people outside the city call immediate that has not come up here.

it just -- no matter haaccommendation will not work in terms tell place an extra hurdle on anyone who needs to use temperature most will not know. most did not know before. before the pandemic. tell hurt seniors, parents and per if city hall and other when is can't get to city hall. more participation is good and should be encouraged. in spoke about being anotice when many call in making the same point. butt points of your position is to hear when the community has to say if many are making the same point may be it should affect what are voting for. many of us wait long hours to comment and most of us waiting are in the paid unlike the supervisors. and thank you. next speaker, please.

jop i'm calling to apose this measure. i live in the bayview the far neighborhoods that have been referenced. it is hard to get to city hall to speak. some points not brought up the 2 examples mandelman gave of jfk and redistrictingure examples of increased engagement from locals. i don't think there is an argument outside people called in it was locals working families people who were error committed to making sure redistricting works. some solution time has been suggested. why can't you cut down timing if you know there will be a lot of public comment there is hour now if you knead a minute or 30 seconds you would have cut it

sdpoun have people participate. at the state level they say support or oppose. i don't see why you can't do that for contentious issues. there have not been a reason to get rid of remote comment besides costs and costs have not been discussed at all. and in conclusion you know a lot of us don't know what the supervisors think we can't responded until we see i hope you 39 comment on public comment and hearing our voices and know that removing public comment is in the the way to go. thank you. >> next speaker, please. glide recognizes social justice

to fight injustices. some ways we do this lifting the voice of marginalized community making sure they have access. covid changed the world we are not the same. cell brit the change and the 8 for people to have access thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. this is debbie with the an front human services network. we understand the challenges of sitting through long meetings but remote public comment has been one of the few gifts coming out of the pandemic. this is an issue of equity. remote public comment enabled

democracy for those never participated before your middle eastings are during the day. people with resources and privilege can participate in person. but in person meetings exclude working people. low income. parents with children, seniors, disabilities care givers no transportation and higher risk from covid the greatest impact on communities of color. people like me who have the privilege of being able to anticipate in person spent hours of our time waiting for our 2 millions this is to not just for the board but will sends a significant malto commissions in other bodies some of which reverted in person only. public comment is not just for you it plays a role in educating the public on different perspectives we urge you to

continue remote comment. san francisco has been and should continue to be a model for this country. thank you, please, vote no. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors i'm [inaudible]. paul i'm the chair of the democratic club and speak somebody last there are years. you forget that the government is of the people by the people and for the people. and harvey's word the uses. we other uses. 16 then and there people in the city living with hiv and 73%

over 50 many have mobility. i'm made to learn this is in the financial low motivated not about saving money it is because the supervisor who experienced this legislation proposes dismanualing this avenue of public access to government the same supervisor stated public comment does in the change his position on legislation. that's dismaying. it is notices in the fafts manifesto long-term survivors of hiv and aids. which was pushed through by supervisor mandelman. without public ment i'm sure hat 3.3 million dollars in the mayor's budget we secured for hiv prevention services would not have been possible. i know that arlington way to comment is e mail.

i know how much i get in my in box in a day and barely get through 20% i can't imagine how many you all get. it is dimaying to know that supervisor mandelman constituents are people with hiv, older in the castro. and this again is just cutting off public access is not the answer. i yield my time thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. bruce wrofl a member of race and equity and haight ashbury council and district 5 residents of spoking for moiz as a mfbt sunshine task force. i'm here on a short break from work outside of the city 45

machines away. it is obvious this is unpreponder lawyer proposal. i echo all opposing this and the demonstration of public comment is prove how successful remote access is. despite the pandemic and technology remote access to public meeting system a given. a person with disability and serving in the seat reserved for people for disabilities on the sunshine task force i tell you how hard post pandemic to participate in person others have been clear about how dangerous it may be. despite that i condition template how i may attends the sunshine task force meetings to request reasonable accommendation and the public can't do this. that it is a privilege. that i don't take lightly. the covid pandemic may be

subsided for the moment but virus leaving people with suffering disabilities. people whether mildly ill or home bounds have a right to participate in the public process of which public testimony is primary watch meetings during workday remote access allowed evers those who cannot travel to participate. other municipalities have made the adjustments respecting people's time and efforts to be participating. i urge this proposal to be rescinded or a no vote. >> thank you. next speaker, please. [inaudible]. i'm calling to add my name in opposition [inaudible] to [inaudible] ends remote public

comment. i think there is more at stake than resource this is is a conversation about access to particular. and not the quality of that access the impact of it but the approximate terrible impact of the access on the decisions making. that is what democracy is about. about equality for all. the upon many areas the pandemic forced us to think different low how to use technology i don't think we should unlearn the lessons especially as we than in person participation means the potential for participation is reduced. i'm not hearing anything in this move that will preserve that or make it easy to participate in

the future. i'm here to say remote participation should be allowed for all not accommendation. with asl captioning and interceptioning and the city can't prioritize over those that are tasked with serving. i want to say right not about the access but the potential and i hope this will be you wuk away from this with and this is all. thank you. >> thank you. >> can we have our next caller. >> hello i'm a san francisco resident and [inaudible] without a formal disability i'm goldbar and thankful for remote access and many meetings in the pastmentive want to ask to you check your listening ears are on. i seen some supervisors talking to each other and know that these are long approximate hard

to stay still. i recommend figit toys. i teach students in san francisco about their voices in the city. i will not tell them if you don't see the value of remote access to public meetings. and i help we don't take steps to hear people's voices like my home country. everyone said everything i wanted say. thank you and don't forget to listen to us. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> this proposal is censorship. >> okay. is this call are still on the

line? okay move on. we will check back later. >> hello i'malis active number of disability action i support speeshs about the importance public engage am accessible to all. so, spoken testimony can be more moving and persuasive than written. i'm sure you get a lot of e mails. i will there are so many i will focus on people should not have

to risk long covid to be able to give you public testimony. >> i live with a beloved person with a week immune system i don't want to risk giving covid to him or anyone no one should have to. many people are not aware haupon upon even wearing a mask n-95, does in the protect you. from covid. had you are near other who is are unmasked. the february 15th, 22 article titled, why one way mask suggest not a good healing solution, explains, a study conducted 7 people trying masks and most n95 does not [inaudible] participates face well. what was going to say it was

perception whether they fit well did not match up with the actual testing. and the tested and protection when you -- one study shows -- 15 present -- thank you. for the record what we are allowing 2 minutes per peeshg on this matter and i apologize for cutting anybody off. next speaker, please. >> yes. i'm michael nulty. i am a member of the senior and disability action. so the executive director of alliance for better district 6 and program director of tenant

association coalition of san sdpran with other organizations. there is more than 100 people organizations that are against this proposal. i think it is more like several thousand if you did a survey. of organizations that would be stuck supporting and again haa caller said is censorship. you upon can't expect elected officials to hold their post and at city hall and not hear a good portion of the community and hear their opinions when asked. and i also agree with the fact as written needs to be changed. i think one problems we have at city hall is -- at last minute amendments made to legislation

and not people have to be made aware what the final outcome of legislation simple the way they do that is participating. so -- please, give us a voice. don't take away a voice. thank you. next speaker, please. >> gentlemen, public comment is essential to democracy. should expanding the opportunity for public participation. supervisors have revisions to make it remote low under certain conscience which are conditions members teenage bill 2449 allows supervisors to state because fizzical or family medical emergency or just cause including childcare or care giving needs, illness or a disability.

san francisco code alighthouse sprierdzs to participate in meetings remote with a parental leave. public faces problem in attending the meetings making comments and should be afforded the same. since anyone time there will be members of the public facing ness and gentleman cannot [inaudible] supervisors should continue to make comment by teleconference for any member of the partial i realize that comments can take a lot of time. we move thingsingly get fortunate. public comment does not allow for finding anyones moving forward. ask at rules vote no on the proposal to end remote comment. thank you for your time. >> thank you.

next speaker, please. >> good morning i'm peter district 8 resident speak with senior disability action and 100 organizations that oppose this measure. touched well around public comment for health, safety and access. as the pandemic conscience. as well as the troubles with leading a carve out for accommodations leave many out. the accommodation policy will result exclusion we will found a way through remote comment to expand access should be celebrated not undiagonal look to inoerate and expand access and do it better and better. vote no preserve remote

participation. next speaker, please. >> hi. supervisors i'm [inaudible] and [inaudible] [muffled audio] i get it hours of public comment the same exact thing is annoying but this is part of your job you signed up for. other issues [inaudible] [cannot understand speaker].

the idea that [inaudible] i don't think that [inaudible] if this statute reason are you doing that for in person is this how will you not [inaudible] 300 not from sf come in, check id's? what is this does in the make sense. i knowledge [inaudible] the same prior to prepandemic. if you don't want to listen i rather you be honest. it is more respectful. so, here is another tip this might help. can write e mails [inaudible] reading the beginning how much letter in supportful nonsupport this might help. the proposal ending remote public comment [inaudible] help

people resources. please, be honest don't support this, thank you. next speaker, please. >> i'm don. i'm a member of the [inaudible] i'm calling to express opposition. upon since the pandemic remote comment is an expansion to democracy. can i havic engage am opening up to everyone who cannot take time off. the question to be [inaudible] who is allowed to have a voice in the government [inaudible]. those who are affected by the actions of government.

[inaudible] this benefit pandemic opened the door to allow regular working people to royce opinions who live throughout the city. [inaudible] [inaudible] not would have been able to express their opinions in the last 2 years had they not had remote public comment. this board will not [inaudible] collective concerns of our communities on issues that will affect their lives and futures. [inaudible] in the most vulnerable and most impacted by your decision and deserve the right to be heard i urge you to reject this motion. and expand democracy not [inaudible]. thank you. thank you. next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon, i'm robert a rolfe tear league with san francisco [inaudible]. i'm here to tell you san francisco unity opposed this bill many heard public comment takes too much time as someone who listens to public comment miami opinion is that there is an element of truth but the solution is not to limit to give public comment. social and racial [inaudible] tilted toward the white approximate wealth especially in person. before the pandemic. and when the pandemic [inaudible] i thought this might change telephone hasn't. the issue is not the amount of public comment rather the issue is that san francisco's political system encourages

gentlemans by micromanagement by the board. array of items come before the board of supervisors and commissions does in the have to. and this has a ripple affect on all aspects of local gentlemanful i asked the board of supervisor consider a different approach. the examples of redistricting and golden gate park taking public comment are simple low going to happen. these are black swan events when you gift public the opportunity to have public comment. we had have the decisions which are not necessary low based in the discretionary arbitrary [inaudible] board is busy enough without all of hearings it has. some of these could be

facilitated prior and some could be replaced with different forms of decision making. we should meet people where they are and meet people >> speaker time is up. >> next speaker, please. >> hello san francisco. good morning i'm aposed to removing public ment typeset is rekosovoing to hear many san franciscans voices. we don't all agree but i like to hear had you think. it is very apparent that receiveiel mandelman does not want to hear had we have to say. his privilege onliments to talk to certain people and that's not fair for all of us. we all are in you know whether

parents, be disabled, working you know it is black history month african-americans have less access to having voice heard. understanding our needs in the community. and to hear a supervisor or 2 supervisors spend their time how to remove public comment tells mow they don't like their job. they don't like to help people of different areas. approximate that you know may be he should resign this it is appalling. this is very undemocratic. and hoe should be embarrassed. i'm embarrassed for him. and for anybody else who votes for this. i don't care the public comments are long. i don't care it was long in redistricting or that it was long during many other forums we listened. i want to heart public and he

should as well. thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm at that timeum, i am with cjcj and jjpa, i would like to echo voices this morning. a lot of people said hi would like to say. i'm at work at my desk. i think alost working class can't always get down to city hull in person. i would like toup lift the poor people and the disabled community.

it is unacceptable to have public low appointed officials opposed hearing the vis of the public to which they are ash counselable. thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm art the sf gray panthers i oppose this proposal. ? proposal weakens equity mesan pran and harder for in and not others to speak in the upon appropriate context and provide feedback during meeting in role time and equal as those in person. we can seat account act of officials to some voters this has an impact on those are not

able to attend the board of supervisors meetings in person. this proposal detries elected efficients from hearing meeting in realty time. valuable feedback and ideas from the public and not others. this results in a po terrible lots of feedback and ideas not heard or considered equal low which are expressed those privilege to attends. that is a loss can be trans laid to the legislation by the boofrmentd and benefit all. some cannot attend in person for a number of upon reasons. disability, work, transportation, parenting. our san franciscans who face those to in person attention less worthef heard in role time by officials on matters of importance? we all deserve equal access to government. eliminating remote comment is

unwise for opportunity for engage am by some and not others vote, no on this proposal. rules made in public interests. listen to all of us. thank you. next speaker, please. good upon afternoon. 2 of the height male dudes left the room. joe, here. we got a serious situation. you oughta occur. we then and there my favors supervisor likes to [inaudible] she does that again. somebody wants to testify if out of area. say have a be disability and can't get to san francisco in time. accommodation was denied you have a civil right's lawsuit.

that was in the a mart move you got supervisor stefani and [inaudible] in the civil right's lawsuit. very smart of you. not that mart. i know you mean well, i know oh , you mean well, butt fact there is no working [inaudible] on this is an issue and i have to say, what really needs to happen is reimagine public comment. look at what is going on. realist take a queue prosecute jurisdictions this made this work instead of silencing the public. nobody supports this. we like you as a person. this is in the smart and i ask to you with draw the resolution i'm trying to be respectful and like you supervisor stefani

return to health [inaudible] ask her to vote no on this. i have a bad cold. i am not down there i have a cold. hopefully you will take [inaudible] under consideration as a body. thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> thank you this is steven warfield head of library user association i'm thrill exclude pleased to hear all of the speakers previously and hear all of their rarelying and differing opposition as we oppose this as well. the idea of cutting back on the ability of the public to make

public comment i think is awful and wrong. by law you are not allowed discriminate or require payment or qualifications for entering your chambers. i think you had in the are qualifications for the public who wants to comment during a meeting. if anything, one advantages of having much public comment is for the citizens. and others to hear who is -- what side of had and what opinion dp had reasons. i think make access easy is an person step on improve public comment including remotely the

clerk's office available had there are technical difficulties and others are as well. one called during business xhours can patch you in. error often people are trouble with the instructions. and so on. you may have difficulty coming through remote but i thank you could being there are steps that could be improved. as for can have thes it is democracy. we have 24 hour police, fire, hospitals and a range of other things this should be pol as well. just get the folks paid to carry this. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> um, hi this is regina i'm in district 2. sent i letter on saturday with comments and i want to talk about a couple of them here. one is i'm opposed to this

ordinance. i don't think we should limit remote public comment. i have been retired for 10 years, i have not been active until the last 8 months. in terms of the board of supervisors because of the 72 hour advance noise requirement. did not work for me and i don't believe it worked for others. keep need this remote comments. we need to eliminate our carbon footprint here. and do something about global warming.

we need to get a survey approximate each xhigs and board and committee hearings maintaining remote comment. thank you. thank you for sharing your comments. >> this is [inaudible] i'm a district sick resident a public policy commune organizer and i'm supporting disability action. begin the right wing attackod democracy it it is appalling politicians [inaudible]. working clasdz, disabled, people of color and machineoling walspeaker deserve an opportunity to give input in decisions made. it is not about supervisors listen to input it is about our

participation and decisions that impact our lives. that participation is upon important to keep you accountable. you should explore ways to ensurety public has more equal fapgz instead of limiting our input. i want to comment that not one person today commented in favor of this resolution. all of the thank you. >> good afternoon. channel telewith planning

coalition. we cover 3 grass-roots organizations across the city and organize for san francisco that empowerhouse marginalized communities bipoc, imupon grant, seniors and people with disabilities to determine our future legislation works against this. 1 huh community organizations sent you a letter demanding san francisco keep remote comment to share in opinions on issues that impact lives. i urge you to look at that letter and off the signatures at the bottom of the letter and see how many communities are telling you how important typeset it is for equal access through remote participation. eliminating remote comment is i disservice. i urge you to reselect it.

thank you. good afternoon supervisors [inaudible] i'm with housing [inaudible] of san francisco i'm one of the 107 organizations who signed on to the letter the previous commenter spoke about. and sent to the board of supervisors oppose thanksgiving legislation. the fact that leading during the day when working people can't take time off from work. they are tiebl call in for a couple of machines to take their turn it creates having remote access creates an opportunity for every day people elders and have be disabilities and have to be out of town and still want their voice heard.

and at work. >> thank you. next speaker, please.

health dp other issues we looked for a comp moiz and cannot finds one and accommendation policy is in the a compromise. and not acceptable. remote participation should be allowed for all. requiring to identify as disabled a barrier this makes less likely for people to sxapt nondisabled people anticipate remotely. i oppose this unpopular proposal. thank you. next speaker, please. >> supervisors, i'm francisco decosta. i represent the first people san francisco.

we, the people, have to speak to power and no supervisor has a right to deny us our rights. we have thousands of people who have healing compromised. we can peek from home. you supervisors should know this. and this should have never come to this stage. where, we the people are disrespected! we the people, never be disrespected. our represent the first people of this area. the land was stolen! and the least you can do is

respect the people. hustart disrespecting san franciscans, you hit below the belt. you have cast your raw nerve. get this right! stop this utter nonsense! thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon i'm kevin o tiz copresident of the san francisco democratic club i'm calling to apose this motion. i think we need to be expanding public participation not limiting it. we expanded voting right in the city by moving even number years

and mail ballots. make it easy noted hard. we can hold remote comment in an easy virtual way. there are seniors in the city 30% in the next 20 years. we need to making sure that we make it easy for seniors to participate. i want to expand upon the idea this public comment does in the change minds i disagree. public comment expanded hear remote provides extra avenues. sometimes you sit through items the public has many opinions on. i seen habitualeds of people come out before the pandemic to planning talking about how cannabis is bad and many myths about it and we seen that pressure, pressure folks on planning on that. it is important to listen to constituent and making sure we are in i place we allow folks to

participate remote and virtual. it is like yes, can be tire some jump nothing to very long [inaudible] right that is not [inaudible] that is because called by the state emergency. [inaudible]. we really have been able to see hait would be like in a world where we are public comment in san francisco. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. good morning, supervisors and engaged citizen i'm doctor derrick kerr i inform the audience society of professional journalists the first amendment coalition the pacific need media worker's guild and californian

aware all oppose this measure. they have submitted a written statement to the board of supervisors. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello this is melanie grossman i'm the president of the older women's log. we are opposed this proposal. and support access to public comment. it is our mission among other things to help makeoar women's voices heard. older women vote. we pay tax system have a right it payment. it is important to have access of through our land lines. . not everyone has a cell phone. access to wifi or access to

public transportation. or a family to advocate for them. older people have a right to peek out rather than shut up. because our leaders are too busy to listen. thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm sarah hoffman. i was thrilled to become a u.s. citizen last year. i'm passionet being in san francisco and engaging with civic life. i'm calling to comment while i'm working remote a my day job [inaudible]. i don't have the flex at had i'm working full time to go to city hall. wrap you have the ability to spend hours sitting at city

hall. parents with care giving responsibilities. people upon who can't access transit anyone who works. and private covid. doesn't reflect diversity of san francisco. allowing remote public comment is crucial to democracy. and when price are we putting on democracy had weigh say that having too long meeting system [inaudible]. and that was an issue prior to covid. i remember sitting in many in person planning meetings pass 11 p.m. it is a huge burden to put on people. i think we should celebrate enthusiasm france fran to participate remote low in the public meetings don't pass this amendment.

next speaker, please. naline was not attended. next caller? good afternoon, supervisors calling from the panhandle haight ashbury in capacity [inaudible] i think that we heard really good arguments. every speaker, honestly. i'm unable to be there i are mobile issues. hi a doctor's appointment. and if you want to be hum belled have something wrong with your body so your mobility is

impacted you must include remote participation for everyone. it is just unthinkable dp unsdem accuraticor city is falling apart. all of our systems are just not work. it behooves citizens like me who are engaged in purke for improved public transit and more affordable housing. for, every issue you name it, helping unhoused people on the walk in our neighborhoods because our city departments are not functioning properly. you want to limit our comment? you want to limp our input to you? hour elected officials? you represent us. why would you cut out our eyes and ears the input we have, i

don't understand this. it is a terrible idea. we must have fair and just access for all san franciscans. and please, vote this down thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. i'm karen on the board of san francisco gray panthers senior disability action and haight/offerbury neighborhood council. the iron in this situation is palpable. the feedback 99.9% call in this in itself should tell you something. i was dismayed that is arrogance as this measure was presented to

the board and the public. i have no idea if the speaker is aware of this. but he might want to review the tape. not going to speak long others have covered what i believe to be the relevant. i will repeat something said by one speaker and that is -- remember the government is of, for and by the people. listen to the people. vote this town. thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. i'm evelyn. senior and a person living with multiple sclerosis, i'm speaking on behalf of all san franciscans a 72 hour advance request for a reasonable accommendation to

virtual attends be the law this morning i and most people listening would not be here to see behind this iron curtain. this required 72 hour request for accommendation only made at the gun point of the ad a otherwise no one would be granted remote access to government, everyone would be barred. brood band is here and opened participation democracy such as never before there is no going back. eliminating comment sever access to civic engagement let's not close the on democracy. thank you for listen to me calling from a land line. >> thank you. next speaker, please. good afternoon this is melissa

i'm here with senior disability action another royce and plug to keep remote access available. people have approximate already said a lot of points i was going to make. but lots of communities rely on remote acstoesz have voices heard. cutting this off would cut access to so many group and different individuals. let's move forward and in the back. there are different ways we can approach stream lining meetings cutting access is not one of them. it is the disability community, people who can't risk getting sick from covid and also small business owners who need businesses running. can't afford to take a day off to come in. so, please, don't cut this off and keep remote access for

public comment available. thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello i'm judi i live in district 4. and i'm also a senior. and -- i'm speaking for moiz in many neighbors and voters of san francisco in my district. who want and need to be able to comment by phone and may be by video for government meetings. the option of call nothing makes many people.

upon public ment accessible. thank you. for considering this. bye. dwro thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello prierzs i'm allen, and i listen to the comments, i just -- there are so many twice anticipate of office hours at coffee shops is something supervisor mandelman does. we have e mail. we have phone calls into the supervisor office all day long every day. and we have meetings with the supervisor in his office. if we like to do this.

so -- when i hear comments about how this measure will sever access to civic engage am, or hear people forced to come in in order to participate in the civic process. these are all just alarmist and extreme. there are a number of ways we participate. and -- if we think about this anticipation. imagine if we were to have only participation in a chamber the laws are discussed. well then the limitation would be the size of the room. size of the legislative chamber. so -- in this example, though, the limitation is sheer number of calls that are manage in. it is not managerable.

and that is a threat to particular. to have that break down happen. is that is dangerous. so -- i am strongly in favor of reason accommendation here even though i normally would be against this. i find this after a lot of thought to be the way we need to go and supervisor mandelman i'm proud you are my supervisor. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> next speaker, please. >> hello. [echo] sorry about that. i'm a member of senior and

statement action and i just wanted to comment that -- rafael mandelman when he was introducing said the quiet part out loud never listens to the people nothing that anybody says changes his opinionful i think all citizens of san francisco should hear this loud and clear this is an ablist city government and if you are able-bodied and get down to the chambers to make comment, you are okay. but -- if you are disabled or for any other reason you can't get there physically, they don't want to listen to you. so i hope his constate webs heard him loud and clear that he does not listen to the people and vote accordingly the next

time he is up for reelection thank you. thank you. that was our last public commenter on the phone line. >> thank you, mr. clerk. public comment is closed. i would like to express my appreciation to members of the public those who came today as what was those who called in. you know there is obviously a strong public interest. i think an important part of the discussion remains unresolved how the board rowels of order will be hrmonized or not with the rowels of other commissions, boards and task forces and bodies that comprise the g. city of san francisco. at the ends of the day, this

motion that we are considering reflects the board of supervisor's rule and i think presoysly because of the public interest in participation in our local gentleman meaning this in other busied cites by callers today i'd like to take more time to harmonize this board's approach with other bodies. a consistent theme from comments is people are invest in the democracy. and not solely are a part of it. within 30 brown act busied together come prize our gentleman. it worth taking a week to get all of us on the same page. and i want to reiterate in addition tot responsibilities we have, we here have responsibilities as employers. this it is a decision that very much affects the extraordinarily

dedicated public sector workers for whom inpresent to give public comment. but these are decisions that error much affect hem and their families. not all are entitle toed over time but put in extra time for this. it is also the staff at sfgovtv and sheriffs and deputy city attorneys and many others. and the fact that they are not in a position to take part in public comment does not mean we ignore their concerns. i hope everybody who call in the recognizes that. i want to make sure we reach out to them and units i want to make sure they have a seat, too. even if it in the public as your comment. they are likely to is a stake and want to make comment on it. i would like to make a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair. understanding that we have to make a decision by february 20th

i assure you tell be called back quickly but i want to have the tune to get all of the body says including the board of supervisors on the same page and hear from the folk who is have a strong interest in this. >> chair dorsey we had a person had online waiting list for public comment as we close today would you like allowllow that one person. >> sure. >> have that one person. >> good afternoon, supervisors from the an fran domestic violence. i wanted thank the rowels committee takingum this issue this afternoon this morning now this afternoon. remote public comment exemplifies san francisco values and allows survivors of violence in san francisco to have a voice at city hall without risking

their safety. with all due respect i urge the mitto to continue access and equity for san francisco's vulnerable. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you beverly. so well is i'd like to reiterate i have a motion to continue to the call of the hair. mr. clerk. i want to confirm you are not taking action on the amendment at this time? >> correct. >> the motion is continue the merit to the call of the chair. >> supervisor peskin. >> absent. >> supervisor safai. >> aye. >> chair dorsey. >> aye. >> the motion to continue the matter to the call of the chair is passed without objection. with supervisor peskin being absent. >> thank you mr. clerk. the motion is continued to the cal of the chair will be mr. clerk is there further business?

>> this completes the agenda. thank you we are adjourned. >> who doesn't love cable cars? charging emissions and we're free which we're proud of you

know, it's not much free left in the world anymore so we managed to do that through donations and through our gift shops. you got a real look and real appreciation of what early transit systems are like. this was the transit of the day from about 1875 to about 1893 or later, you know. cable car museum is free, come on in. take a day. come down. rediscover the city. you can spend as time you want and you don't have to make reservations and it's important to be free because we want them to develop a love for cable cars so they do continue to support whether they live here or other places and people come in and say, yes, i have passed by and heard of this and never come in and they always enjoy themselves. people love cable cars and there's none left in the world so if you want to ride a cable car, you've got to come to san francisco. that what makes the city. without the cable cars, you lose part of that, you know, because people who come here and they love it and they love the history ask

they can ride a cable car that has been running since 1888 or 1889. wow! that's something. can't do that with other historical museums. rarely, have i run into anybody from outside who didn't come in and didn't feel better from knowing something about the city. it's a true experience you'll remember. i hope they walk away with a greater appreciation for the history, with the mechanics with people are fascinated by the winding machine and i hope the appreciation, which is a part of our mission and these young kids will appreciate cable cars and the ones who live here and other places, they can make sure there will always be cable cars in san francisco because once they are gone, they are gone. it's the heartbeat of san francisco that founded the cable and the slot and without the cable cars, yeah, we would lose something in san francisco. we would lose part of its heart and soul. it

wouldn't be san francisco without cable cars. [bell ringing] [music] ♪♪