have the perspect situation. you need to take (indiscernible) because if you don't get out of your comfort zone, you won't know what else is out there and opportunities come up that you never imagine will happen. >> secretary fuller, please call the roll. >> good morning. please respond with, here or present. commissioner newhouse segal is present. chair post is present. commissioner turner is present. commissioner paul woolford is absent for this meeting. vice chair zabi is

present with three members present we have quorum for the public works commission, and i just want to please note that the rules for regarding hybrid meetings and remote participation have changed, but remote participation by the public is still a possibility and encouraged and for members of the public who want to comment from outside the hearing room, you would dial 415-655 -0001. use today's meeting id number of 24965523189 fallowed by pound, pound again and to raise your hand to speak press star 3. please note you must limit your comments to the topic of the agenda item discussed unless you are speaking under general public comment. if you do not stay on topic the chair may interrupt and ask you to limit your comment to that item. we

ask public comment made in civil respectful manner and refrain thum use of profanity and please address your remarks to the commission as a whole not individual commissioners or staff. madam chair. >> thank you. before calling the next item, i like to amend today's agenda to postpone item 8, the operations division overview. deputy director durden who is going to make the presentation had a unexpected obligation arise and requested she make the presentation at a later date for she would like to make it herself. any other re quest by the commission to amend today's agenda? alright. thank you. we will move to the next item. announcements by the chair. i just have brief announcements. i like to

thank olivia lee to the response of as needed contracts, i found it helpful. since our last commission meeting i had a number of one on one meetings with public works department stakeholders, primarily discussing permitting and capital project delivery. i also had my monthly meeting with chair am goneen of sanitation and streets commission and i had a quarterly update with board of supervisors president peskin. from my meeting with president peskin i have good news, which is his colleague supervisor mandelman's legislation to abandon the city's 12x restrictions on city employees travel to and ability to do business in states with policies that may differ from san francisco's, that this legislation is likely to be scheduled by the board for their consideration in the next few weeks. as my colleagues

may call, commissioner woolford spoke eloquently why he and i others feel why the restrictions should be abandoned. it cost taxpayer money and project time to adhere to them. last, i have been requested by members of the public works staff to not call dpw and i'm trying to break the habit to call sfpw or san francisco public works so i like to request my colleagues, we all try to say public works and not dpw. we will try our best. that concludes my announcements. secretary fuller, please open this item to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make three minutes of comments on item 1, announcements by the chair, may line up against the wall furthest from the door if present in the chamber. if

calling 415-655-0001 meeting access code 24965523189, pound, pound and then press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. looking in the chamber does not appear we have any members of the public wishing to speak on the chair's announcements. sfgovtv do we have callers to speak on this item? they are indicating that we do not have any callers on this item so we are no further public comment. >> thank you. any questions or comments from the commission on my announcements? >> not on the announcements. i missed a couple meetings and i wanted to announce some things, but i like to get the opportunity to do it

right now. first, i wanted to wish the muslim community in san francisco and the world happy-the breaking of the fast. i wish everyone have a great year every year. i went to arbor day, and i really really want to thank the public works team and staff for having that. it was such an eye opening experience. it was my first time and i loved how the community came all together to plant trees, to learn about the projects that are happening, to actually ride the cherry picker. it was a great experience and i want to thank carla for and her team for planning this and we ended up i

think planting 177 trees, was it? >> 117. >> 117 trees, 200 volunteers were there. that was great. i will do it again. next time remind me so i can make it. i wanted also to thank chair post for her dedication to the commission. while she was traveling she was able to stand recommendation and push to help public works get the budget that was requested and i was my jaw dropped on the floor. thank you for your commitment. i want to thank my colleagues. this has been a very successful week. i got to see them all most every day, and those are my comments. thank

you. >> thank you commissioner zoubi. i did have a question about arbor day. am i mistaken or was the department interim director attending arbor day just as a tree? [laughter] i like to clear up the public record on that, please. >> you are not mistaken chair post. i dawned my tree costume which i reserve for very special occasions, so usually arbor day is where i put that on and it is in fact the best day of the year. >> thank you for clarifying that. alright. i think that concludes the announcement portion. secretary fuller, please call the next item. i beg your pardon, please open public comment. no, we did that. please call the next item. >> the item 2 is the commission secretary's report and my report is very brief and centered on you

sibling commission, the sanitation and streets commission, which held their most recent meeting on monday april 17, and during that meeting they passed a resolution establishing the montoya awards program to recognize laborers and other staff within public works and they did that in partnership with the san francisco building and trades council. and then they heard the department hiring and vacancy report from the human resources team of the department, and then also heard the bureau of building and street repair performance report, and that concludes my report for this meeting. i'm happy to take questions or comments. >> any questions for secretary fuller? if not, please open this item to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make 3 minutes

of comment on item 2, the secretary report may line up gaest in the wall. if you are calling in dial 415-655-0001. use the meeting access code 24965523189, pound, pound, and then press star 3 to raise your hoond hand to speak. and in the chamber, no members of the public approached to speak on the secretary's report, and sfgovtv is indicating we do not have callers who expressed interest in speaking on item 2 either so no further public comment. >> thank you. please call the next item. >> item 3 is general public comment and members of the public who wish to make 3

minutes of general public comment of items within the commission mandate but not on the agenda may line up against the wall. if calling in use that public comment call in number 415-655-0001. use the meeting access code of 24965523189 and then press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. we do have one member of the public with us in the chamber to speak on during general public comment. thank you for joining us. you have three minutes to speak and there will be a chime that tells you when you have 30 seconds left. thank you for joining us. >> adam (indiscernible) local business owner here in san francisco. i traveled by skate board, it is my

low cost low maintenance highly portable way of getting around the city. i have been skating boarding for transpation since i was a kid and a way to avoid having a bike or car in many cities in which i lived. i moved back to the mission recently with my 11 year old and can get around town on skate boards and scooter and we have sidewalks and bike lanes and i'm here today and to make one point about the need to include other modalities with small wheels in design considerations. there are textures and transitions which are easy to navigate when stepping over them or rolling over them but harder to deal with when you have wheels that are 69mm tall. this is just one comment about drawing 87171. if we can bring this up. sorry, thank you.

i'll try to be quick with this. okay, i can probably work with that. driveway construction. 87171. so, this is a driveway drawing in detail and specifications. i to draw attention to this specific detail here from the side view at the curbline. you have a specifically a 1 inch lip height right there, so skate boards for transitation have wheels between 66 and 69mm tall which are 2.7 inches.

half that is 1.35 inches. a wheel that small cannot get over something that is too tall. this is a instance on shotwell of a driveway lip that is much taller then 1 inch. it is well over half the wheel, so well over 1.35 inches. i want to draw attention to this specifically because there are people who want to get around the city by various means. a driveway lip like this means i can't get out of traffic so if there is a lot of stuff going on on the road and my or my child are using this becomes preventative to get out of traffic when it is dangerous so i like to request this 1 inch specification reduce to somewhere between nothing like on curbcuts on sidewalks or maximum of.5 inches. thank you very much. >> thank you. okay.

that is our only public commenter in person. sfgovtv do we have any callers in the queue? and they are indicating we do have one caller. please unmute that caller and caller, you have three minutes to speak and i'll provide you with a 30 second warning when your time is about to expire. >> great. david pillpel, you can hear me okay? >> we can hear you. >> excellent. i wanted to go back to the chair's remarks, vice chair zoubi had additional comments after you had public comment. i'm concerned he may be cherry picking only the things he can remember recently, because there is always a lot happening in the

works. anyway, good comments and great information from both the chair and vice chair. thank you for the work that you do not just in meetings, but substantial additional time you respond outside of meetings attending to the business of the commission and the city. i have not had a chance to look at the minutes yet. if i see something i'll share that afterwards with the secretary fuller. i'm a little challenged because my computer keeps crashing and i'm trying to juggle three different meetings now. i did notice on item 5c not related to the substance of the item, but it looked to me like the long title on the agenda duplicates the description, stow it is a little confusing, unless i missed something, it looks like it simply was copied twice in there. anyway, those were my thoughts right now. as always, thanks for listening. >> thank you caller.

that is our last public comment. that concludes public comment. >> thank you. so, our public speaker who attended today does not need to hang around to the end of the meeting when we discuss new business. i like to ask interim director short if she could get back to the commission with comments on the gentleman's proposal. i'm not familiar with the 1 inch he explained to us for skateboards and small wheel vehicles. i like to learn more and get the department's comments on that. may i please request at a future meeting and sooner rather then later when the department can explain to us what the speaker was referring to and help us understand so we can act to make some changes if we think we should. >> sure, happy to do

that. if i may take a moment here today for the benefit of the speaker. the roadways actually are designed to function also as conduits for storm water, and that happens even if we are just cleaning the streets for example. the function of the gutter and the reason we generally have a lip of some sort is prevent the water flowing up and on the sidewalk or properties. having said, that, we can take a look to see if there is any room to adjust that minimum or maximum or minimum value. >> thank you. i want to be sure the public feels safe when they are on skateboards and small wheel vehicles and that we can address that if possible. thank you very much. commissioner newhouse segal.

>> what agency or department is responsible for establishing the rules for what kinds of wheeled vehicles are used on sidewalks and streets? because we are talking about a transition from the street to the sidewalk here. >> yes. thanks commissioner newhouse segal. you were asking what city agency is responsible for determining what type of vehicles are allowed on sidewalks or streets. good question. there are a number of state regulations that actually regulate what can be placed-what types of wheeled vehicles can be used on sidewalks, but our sister agency, the san francisco municipal transportation authority would be responsible for the local regulations around that. >> i would suggest if we are going to make it easier to

transition from the street to the sidewalk or from one area that is regulated in one way to another, i think we should be aware that that involves more then just paving or whatever. >> thanks. generally if public works or any city agency proposes a change to specifications that might impact another city agency, we have a process to refer those proposals to the other city agency, receive feedback from them, try to address feedback before we make any changes so we definitely want to be sure we don't have unintended consequence by making a change to one of our specifications so we'll always refer to the other relevant city agencies. >> thank you. i would really like in the future if there are any changes made or any decisions made for this commission to be made aware of those so we can

answer-so we are aware as the public who uses those different modes of transportation. >> will do. >> thank you. >> thank you. secretary fuller, please call the next item. >> item 4 is director report. interim director carla short is here to present. this is informational item. >> good morning commissioners. carla short, interim director public works. commissioner turner, welcome. sorry i missed your inaugural meeting. happy we can enjoy nice spring weather and there are a handful of items i like to bring to your attention today. i want to give a update oen the third street bridge. very pleased to report that the bridge, which as you know was battered in the

major storm march 23 which 3 run away barges ramped into, is once again able to resume lifts. we conducted a series of test lifts this week raising the draw bridge to 45 degree angle and increasing to the 70 degrees. all the mechanisms were in good shape. we had structural engineers on site. our expert staff not only conducted visual inspections during the test lift but also listened for any unusual sounds and luckily all was good. apparently it is normal to have creeks and growns when the bridge is lifted for the first time after a period of being closed. we did notify the coast guard that we deem the draw bridge to be operational and safe and let the house boat community at the mission creek know they can once again request lifts. we had been keeping the span in the down position in the weeks

after the storm until we determine with confidence public safety is not jeopardized by raising the bridge or not stuck in the up position. as reported to you at the last commission meeting we kept the bridge open for crossings by skate board, bikes, scooter, foot or motorized vehicle since the day after the storm. however , the east side wooden walkway remains closed. there is other damage to the bridge that doesn't impact structural soundness but must be repaired. that work will take time and our cost estimate is $6.5 million, so it isn't insignificant. we don't have a final timeline for the work and identifying how the work will be paid and we'll keep you updated. special thanks to everyone who worked to get us where we are today. not just engineers but the carpenters and sheet metal workers who removed the damage portion of the bridge and made the path of

travel safe. next up micro surfacing. april 10 we kicked off the annual micro surfacing pavement preservation operation we run through infrastructure design construction street resurfacing program. micro surfacing is a mixture of liquid oil and crushed rock which preserve the asphalt pavement protecting the service from effect of natural aging, rain and heat. it can extend the life of pavement at a fraction of the cost by restoring the surface of the roadway sealed off moisture and prevents oxidation that require more costly repaired down the road. the cost to micro surface one block is about $50 thousand. complete rebuild can cost 10 times that. micro surfacing takes 2 days to complete on a block compared to several days or weeks for full roadway construction which include street base

repairs and repaving. the first application of micro surfacing is applied fallowed by a second application typically a week after the first. this is a efficient and cost effective way to prolong the life of streets. it really helps cut down on the potential for the road to get impacted by water and create additional potholes. we are scheduled to wrap this current operation up the third week of may and plan to resurface 82 blocks and 17 intersections. as of yesterday, we were at 31 blocks and 4 intersections. you may have read about the event commemorating the 1906 earthquake at the fountain. every year april 18 at 512 exactly city officials of san francisco history gather at the fountain located on a pedestrian island at the intersection of market geary and kearney streets to mark the

anniversary of the 7.9 magnitude quake causing deaths and property damage. the fountain which is city and national landmark serve as significant meeting place thin aftermath of the devastating earthquake and fire and every year the crews make sure the fountain sparkles shines and in good working condition for the event. last week our staff including plumbers, electricians, stationary engineers inspected every in the fountain is in good shape and gave a thorough cleaning to dislodge debris. back at the fountain before dawn on the day of event to make sure everything ran smoothly and trouble shoot problems that might pop. the ceremony went smoothly drawing a big crowd including mayor breed, former willy brown

(indiscernible) early 20th century garb. the fire sirens sounded at 512 and crowd broke out in song single san francisco. our scope of work was not big but impact is huge as we did our part to make san francisco history is kept alive and collectively be reminded we are a city sof resilience that rises and rebuilds. that is a message that certainly needs to be heard today. and that is it for my report today. happy to take any questions. >> thank you. any questions or comments for mrs. short from the commission? alright. please open the item to public comment. [providing instructions for public comment]

looks like we have mr. (indiscernible) how you pronounce your last name? provide comment on this item. go ahead, please. you have 3 minutes to speak and there will be a chime when you have 30 seconds remaining. >> thank you very much. the micro surfacing. loving all the new pavement in the city, great and smooth stuff. i dont know the specific details of this micro surfacing, but i want to make a note that sometimes solutions like this that involve aggregate and liquid can be textured to the point of slowing down transportation by small wheeled vehicles so while i totally understand the value of cost savings and reducing the timeline of these

projects and absolutely appreciate the budgetary concerns there, i want to make a point that if there isn't consideration taken for this there might be adverse effects, so if there is anything that can be done around the granularity of the aggregate or nature of the liquid and the interaction with things like small wheels, wanting to make sure we are not creating conditions for people who go by small wheeled means. thank you. >> thank you. and that appears to be the only person in person who wants to speak on this item. sfgovtv do we have callers in the queue? and they are indicating there are no callers so that concludes public comment. >> thank you. secretary fuller, please call the next

item. >> item 5 on the agenda is the consent calendar of routine matters. it includes the minutes from april 7, 2023 meeting of this commission. one job order contract award. one as needed contract award and one construction contract award. all three contract awards are eligible for consent calendar in accordance with the contract delegation policy adopted by this commission and please note a number of corrections for clarity have been made to the minutes in items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10 and 11. appreciate commission members for pointing those out to commission staff. all consent calendar items can be heard individually upon request by a commissioner, staff or the public, but happy to take corrections to the minutes or questions. adoption of the consent calendar and

all resolutions is action item. >> thank you. i have a question on one of the items on consent calendar. it regards 5d, the minnesota street scape improvements. perhaps interim director short you can answer it. what is the ipic eastern neighborhoods funding source? what is that funding source? >> that is-the development impact fees that are collected from development-trying to remember what it stands for. do you know, bruce? okay.

interagency plan implementation committee. those are development impact fees that are collected and then they are used in accordance with one of the basically the area plans that have been developed, so those fees can be used to implement one of the approved area funds, so-sorry, area plans. they are usually site or neighborhood specific funds that can be allocated towards improvements identified in that neighborhood plan. >> so, in short funds collected in the neighborhood stay in the neighborhood, is that a way of putting it? >> yes. >> thank you. commissioner zoubi. >> just correction to the minutes. >> there were extensive correction submitted. have you look at the most recent draft or- >> the one online right now? >> secretary fuller, is that a correct draft or

original draft? >> the one posted online is the corrected version so further corrections would be welcome. >> yes, please go ahead. >> lauren isn't acting anymore. >> thank you for that. >> any further comments or questions on the consent calendar before we open the item to public comment? hearing none, please open the consent calendar to public comment. >> [providing instructions for public comment]

>> i made a mistake in procedure, i like to correct. is there a motion to adopt the consent calendar of routine matters? >> so moved. >> thank you. now we'll open the motion to public comment. >> thank you. members who wish to speak on the item follow those instructions that i just gave, and to note while anyone may be approaching to speak on this item, we are working to decrease the temperature in this room. i know city hall responds fairly slowly to changes in temperature, so my apologies to commissioners and everyone present for the temperature. it appears we do not have any members of the public who would like

to speak on the item in person and sfgovtv is indicating we do not have any callers wanting to speak on this item. that concludes public comment. >> thank you. if no further debate on the consent calendar, all in favor of adopting the consent calendar please say yes. >> yes. >> i believe it issuenanimous unanimous and consent calendar passes. secretary fuller will publish the minutes once final corrections are made and all resolutions to the commission website. we will move to item 6, secretary fuller, please call that item on the regular calendar. >> item 6 is the san francisco public library support services-190 9th street energy efficiency hvac up grades and photovoltaic panels and contract award. this

item will be presented--this item will be presented by project manager sherry cats. the value of this contract is above the threshold for it to be considered by this commission and also to be considered individually on the regular calendar jis the is a action item. mrs. cats, the floor is yours. >> thank you. do i-- thank you.

good morning chair post and commissioners zoubi, newhouse segal and turner. sherry cats bureau project management here to recommend the award och san francisco public works contract 199 street energy efficiency. in the amount of 5 million, 697 thousand, 259 dollars with a construction duration of 455 calendar days to the contractor trico construction. this project is located at 190, 9th street and includes replacing the existing roof top hvac efficiency with new equipment and replacing with new build up roofing system and installing no photovoltaic panels and batteries on the roof

to provide facility resilience. the library support service building is located south of market street on the corner of howard and 9th. it is three story, 45 thousand square foot facility and mest of the work will take on the roof top. i will continue. it seems to not be the full one. i will just wing it. so, the project purpose is-this is a maintenance type of project that also focuses on

energy resiliency and efficiency, and as i said, it includes replacement of all the hvac equipment that is past the useful life and need of continuous maintenance, so we are replacing. the panels and batteries that cover 40 percent of the 15 thousand square foot roof were designed and funded by puc and provide 35 percent of the build ing energy needs and pu c will own and maintain once the project reaches substantial completion. the facility is the location of san francisco public library technical support services. tss serves as the library collection and technical service division and keep the library collection vital and up to date through ordering cataloging and preservation of library materials. it is the

main distribution center to all the library branches throughout the city. and this concludes my presentation. staff recommends that commission award to trico in order to advance project to the construction phase and happy to respond to questions from the commission. >> thank you. nice to see you again. >> nice to see you. >> i had the pleasure touring fire station with mrs. katz she had overseen renovation to. there was a fire station however that hadn't been renovated yet in the tenderloin i think it was. >> fire station 3. >> yes. i did not feel safe and thought the firefighters couldn't feel safe either. any word when the fire station is in the queue to be seismically retrofited and brought up to 21 century standards? >> the think the bond is at capacity for 2020 so i think it

will be 2028. >> we look forward having public hefft to move that forward because i commented to the captain taking us through, i hope there isn't a major earthquake now or we all will die. i think it dates-maybe shortly after the 1906 earthquake interim director short was relating to so look forward to maybe advancing that. thank you, i realize that doesn't pertain to the presentation today. i have no questions about the project. any colleagues have questions for mrs. katz about the library hvac upgrade. >> i was pleasantly surprised to see the integration of batteries into the resiliency plan. what's the expectation of the battery able to provide that resiliency, is it 12 hours, is it 24 hours? how are you envisioning it and again, i think it is great we are introducing batteries, but how are you envisioning in

terms of resiliency and operations or do you know? >> i don't want to say for certain, but i think we talked about either 8 or 12 hours. but, i can get back to you on that if you like. >> i would. i think it is a pleasant surprise. of course it is cost, but considering changes to how all solar panels are calculated and resiliency, i really thought that was impactful so love to know about this project the hours and looking forward to my own source to see the great work you are doing. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner zoubi. >> thank you for coming giving the presentation. i just dont know what photovoltaic- >> pv panels. solar panels. >> solar panels. >> yes. >> what are the

batteries for? >> the batteries retain the power so it doesn't get returned to the grid, so it can be used within the building, and that's the question that was just asked about how long will batteries retain the power. these solar panels are specifically for the building and they don't return energy to the grid. so, that's why the batteries allow for the resiliency. >> the batteries are full charge- >> they charge-anything not used that day will be retained within the batteries. >> anything extra doesn't go back to the grid? >> no. >> thank you. >> quick conversation about batteries. one reason i ask the question and think about our new fire stations, we are fortunate in mission bay our last project we

completed, we put in a battery backup and is intended in emergency, making sure the elevators and residents keep the insulin cool and for the environment standpoint didn't have to bring a diesel or gas generator. i think it is impactful to explore from a resiliency standpoint and environmental protection standpoint. we don't want to diesel generators everywhere because the city does (indiscernible) we need to preserve in this case our as long as we can. that is the biggest tangible benefit from resiliency standpoint and why i love to see more about how we are tackling this. >> i know that puc felt this was a viable candidate for their solar array, because of the size of the roof. it is such a large amount of real estate up there, and so we are taking a lot of it up with some

of the hvac equipment but there was still a lot of room up there. i think one of the photographs will show the roof. the one that gives the address, and you'll see it is just a lot of blank area, so they decided that it was worth the investment. sometimes on smaller projects its not cost effective. >> no further questions or comments we'll open the item to public comment. >> we would need a motion- >> thank you, i did it again. pardon me. is there a motion to approve the contract award for the library up grade we just heard described? >> so moved. >> i'll second that. now we'll open to public comment. thank you. [providing instructions for public comment]

>> it appears we do not have members of the public in person wanting to speak on the item. sfgovtv do we have callers who have expressed interest in speaking on this? they are letting me know there are no callers and so that concludes public comment on this item. >> thank you. before we vote on the motion, mrs. katz i want to request this. a

year from now we can get a quick update on the progress of the project, if it is on schedule, on budget, if the scope changed. we'll mark the commission calendar for a short update and interim director short i meant to ask on consent calendar, same request for minnesota street scape improvement, short update a year from now on budget schedule and scope for the commission. thank you. >> okay. >> this has a very long duration. the duration of the contract. because the pv and sometimes the hvac equipment as well as very long leave. probably in a year we'll just be at the point where we will not have made the a lot of progress, but we will have procured all the equipment. >> that is fine, even if that is what the update is

just to make sure if that is the expectation- (indiscernible) >> i love to- >> that would be great. thank you so much. >> sure. >> alright. no further comment or discussion, all in favor of approving the contract for the library work please say yes or aye. >> aye. >> i believe unanimous. the motion passes. secretary fuller will public the resolution related to this item on the commission website. it is 1054, i like to take a quick break of 6 minutes and resume at 11 o'clock. thank [meeting reconvened] >> item 7 is changes to the commission charter authority due to proposition b, 2022. deputy city attorney christopher tom will lead this discussion and this is

a informational item. >> good morn ing commissioners. always a pleasure to be here with you. several months ago, we all experienced some changes to the charter that took effect on january 1, 2023, and chair post and other commissioners had requested a briefing on how proposition b, that was passed by san francisco voters in november 2022 changed or effected your jurisdiction or the jurisdiction of this commission as well as the jurisdiction of the sanitation and streets commission. so, that's what we'll be talking about this morning. i want to just acknowledge that you are in a unique and perhaps uninevable position having a lot of changes you

experienced and in the thick of a lot of impactful work. part of our my presentation will just refresh your memory on the recent legislative history that got us to this point and resulted in the formation of this commission, and then i'll walk through visually what changed as a result of the first proposition b of 2020, and then how that was effected by proposition b of 2022. and then we'll go through more granular textual changes to the charter and feel free to stop me any time and we have plenty time to discuss and we don't need to wait to the end for any discussion. recent legislative history. you may

recall that before proposition b of 2020, the public works department was managed by the public works director and overseen by the city administrator. a lot of this has not changed as far as the division of public works consisting of operations, building design and construction, infrastructure design and construction and financial management and administration. so, when proposition b of 2020 took effect, that established the public works commission as well as sanitation and streets commission and department of sanitation and streets, which was largely the operations division of public works, which was removed from the department of public works and became its own independent

department. and for the benefit of just visual representation i'll show you a few charts. this is a context for this new proposition b of 2022. this was the proposition that took effect or the legal effect of this proposition took effect in january of 2023, and it essentially merged department of sanitation and streets back together with the department of public works and it made some changes to the commission-respective commission's authority under the charter. first we'll go through visual changes and then some textual changes. so, this is today. today we have a department of public works, we

have the 4 divisions, and we have 2 commissions that have oversight over aspects of the department. this was the effect of proposition b of 2020. so, the operations division was removed to create the sanitation and streets department. and the two commissions were established. so, as a result of proposition b2020, the operation division was removed from public works. under the new proposition b of

2022, the operations division was merged together back with the department of public works. and then there were modifications to each commission's authority, and we'll talk about that in a second. any questions so far? okay. so, this slide identifies all of the charter sections and one section of the admin-no. all the charter sections that were modified as a result of proposition b, 2022. so, section 4.138 had

described and precribed the requirements for sanitation and streets department. that was removed from the charter. and there were some changes to the charter authority of the sanitation and streets commission. in section 4.139. so, there was one previously a section discussing in 4.139a, the purpose prescribing the purpose of the commission to set policy directives and to provide oversight for the department of sanitation and streets. that has been removed. there were also some differences in what would be deemed the qualifications for commission members, so the composition of this commission-of the sanitation

and streets commission, continues to be 2 seats appointed to consist of 2 seats aopponented appointed by the board of supervisors, 1 by the controller subject to board's conformation and 2 seats appointed by the mayor subject to board conformation. the qualifications, this language has changed in the charter now, so whereas before there were some prescribe requirements, they are now desirable qualifications. i think that's fairly self-explanatory. now you see under section 4.139, the authority of the sanitation and street commission is more prescribed and specified in a way where it was

broader prior to this new proposition b. so, what was removed was the authority of that commission to exercise all powers and duties in section 4.102 of the charter, which enumerates powers and duties of commissions. and then it removed the authority of that commission under section 4.103, which pertains to the annual report for a department that corresponds with that commission, and section 4.1 o4, which relates to regulations and bylaws. and what was added was a more specific language about--the focus of that commission continues to be looking at and establishing standards protocols and procedures related to maintenance of the public right of way. so, you'll see there is new language added

in section 4.139c regarding oversight authority over those --over standards and protocols and maintenance of the public right of way. what is different and new here is that there's a clause that states the commission shall exercise only the powers set forth in this subsection c, and the public works commission shall exercise the authority described in the other sections set forth in 4.141, which will turn back to in a second. yes, please commissioner newhouse segal. through the chair. >> better to interrupt? okay. so, going back earlier, so what

has changed in the sanitation and streets commission mission or authority? they no longer set policy as they did in section 4.139? so, they do not set policy, they set standards? >> that is a great question. what has changed is the broad catch-all authority for commissions to set policy under section 4.102 of the charter, that is the catch-all section that applies under most commissions unless their charter section specifies otherwise, that general authority that includes setting policy has been-is no longer part of that

commission's authority. however, they continue to have some policy making authority with respect to the prescribed areas under section 4.139. under that section, the commission will hold public hearings and set policies regarding-i think it's sanitation standards and protocols. there is a policy function there as well. >> are standards policy? isn't policy a overview of-that's broader then standards? it does concern me and has since this has been passed who sets policy and if we do and if we review that? or even hear what

the sas commission is considering when they set standards, because that's policy. >> certainly. when it comes to the public right of way, it is hard to draw perhaps bright lines as to where one jurisdiction begins and one jurisdiction ends, because the activities are multi-faceted but to your question newhouse segal hear what the san station streets commission what issues they are addressing and how they are deliberating, i think that is always something that this commission can request if it is not squarely in the jurisdiction of this commission. it is information that you're always welcome to request and the

director-interim director short or chair post can continue to provide that information. you may recall that when we started this commission, there was one joint meeting between both commissions that is a practice that some commissions have from time to time. joint meetings between say the planning department and the department and dbi commission, planning commission and dbi meet from time to time jointly. that is also another option for this commission to consider whether there's any interest in doing that, having a joint commission meeting. >> i think we are very interested, if the san station streets commission sets a policy within their purview, is that-do we have a chance to

review it, change it, veto it, not recommend it? in other words, what i'm unclear about is, i saw the chart er language you reviewed, but again, we have oversight for the entire department, the rubber hits the road with us. there are specific requirements of what the commission responsibilities are and they need to do that and live up to them, but again, do we get-does it all come to us or is commissioner newhouse segal says-it is more then just a presentation, it is-is that one thing you are concerned about because i'm concerned about that? >> it is even more basic then that. it looks to me, and obviously i am not a expert in this, that's why i want to have it explained. it looks to me

just from the way it is worded and the way that you are explaining it mr. tom, that they do not make the policy. all they do is set the standards, which are basically how-basically operations. what standards would meet our policy objectives? >> can i add to that question? i'm struggling with this too. real life example that just happened here. we had public comment about skate boards, and so if the streets and sanitation make a decision that they are going to lower it, which would be conflicting with the whole bunch of other street standards and how the street is built, that is from run-off, also vehicular-my question would be, they

passed-they made a motion and said we want to do this, and we know on our side it got all these other issues who prevails? >> i think it is difficult to discuss in the abstract, but i certainly hear your concerns and i--in this city, there are as you know various commissions and various commissions have different degrees of authority under the charter over a certain area. for example, if to the extent there is some changes to the public right of way, speaking of the roadway related to vehicular traffic, that is squarely within the jurisdiction of the mta board. whereas, if there is some issues related to

storm water or pow er or gas, there may be areas where there is a overlap between the work of the puc and the authority of the puc commission, and the work of the department of public works with respect to designing and building sidewalks and roadways. >> that's a good example. i think that is where i get little confused as to again, who would prevail? if steets and sanitation is taking this up they can have a sense of what we should be doing and how to coordinate it and they may have a policy recommendation and we are in the same position with a counter policy recommendation we take back to puc, mta or who ever it is. to you point, i'm not trying to be semantical but trying to be practical which is simply, who sets policy? i think that

commissioner segal is correct, if you read this, it is all most as if we got the authority, but we are delegating them to do very specific things that to me don't read as policy. they all most read as operational or functional things that have to happen so dont know if the intent of the language is they are setting their policy within streets, or are they more from a regulatory standpoint make recommendation that come to us for approval and adoption? >> i thrink it would be safe to say that there are various types of authority that are addressed in these different charter sections. but maybe to bring it to more granular level, under section 4.139, the policy authority is prescribed with respect to minimum standards of

cleanliness and baseline for service to maintain cleanliness of the public right of way. i think it certainly provides that commission with policy making authority. those are rooted in or pertaining to standards of maintenance and cleanliness. i'll add one more perhaps-one other consideration, there are certain standards and statutes under state law that also effect and in some cases limit what the city can do. >> in that case, and again -streets and sanitation absolutely seems they have policy authority that have budgetary authority, so what if they did pass something that is basically a unfunded

mandate? it seems that they lack full authority to actually effectuate a policy change, given the limitation. i'm-how could they not come back to us and say here is our recommendation, but here is the budget, here is staffing, all the things they technically do not control and would need our consent along with the director? >> i think that-you identified certainly one pertinent issue which is budgetary authority of this commission, which is to make recommendations on the public works budget. you are correct that isn't something that is part of the authority of the sanitation and streets commission. how that plays out ultimately i think it is something that we'll work together to implement

smoothly. >> i have a question too, but commissioner zoubi i'll yield to you and ask mine after. >> one reason i asked to have this presentation is to give you a example, in a previous meeting i asked for information about a certain process that had to do with street and sanitation and so city attorney told me stay in your lane, you are not allowed to ask about this stuff, because that's under a different commission. i wanted to know--again, i understand the part that we have budgetary authority, we give the budget, but ultimately the operations manager already asked for that money to work on sanitation and streets. we have-if they need to go over the budget they will

get back to us, but the same time, again like a member of the public came here asking about sidewalk and streets, do we tell him sorry, you are at the wrong commission meeting, or-we just wanted to know where we stand. >> i also want to add in your presentation, the voter pamphlet digest where it says sanitation streets commission hold public hearings and set policies on sanitation issues for the department and i realize what it says in the pamphlet is not the law. the law is what it says in the charter. none the less, when the public voted for prop b in 2022, my guess is most people just would have read the digest and not read the law change, so i have two concerns, which is one, that we are doing what the public thinks we are doing and are sanitation and streets is doing what the public thought they were voting for for them also. and then of

course we are doing what the law states regardless what voters thought. the law is the law. i am cognisant of what expectations were last fall when voters voted not to split the department and to change the commission mandates so i think we'll let you continue the presentation, but i think everyone stated articulately that where the confusion is is that it isn't as we lack things to do, we have plenty things to keep us busy every 2 weeks, however, we just want to be sure that we are carrying out our mandate to the voters and to the city in whether it is setting policies or reviewing standards and why we have full confidence of the sanitation and street commission colleagues-again, this isn't to take responsibility away, just to clarify what we can comfortably rely on them to take care of. fine, we don't need to worry about it, they can deal with it

public on the isues or not. what we need to be worry and happy to work with the public on, that is all we are try ing to get at here. it is really important. maybe interim director short can think of a real example because abstract is tough but there are examples where it could come up or murky who has the final word. please continue, but i think that's the crux of the matter. >> i did have--as a example, you had mentioned mr. tom, that mta would make a basic decision about transportation. so, let's say mta has a policy about use of lanes or sidewalks or whatever, which we discussed earl ier in the meeting, and they would just-i'm

confused about whether their requirements and other agency requirements based on their policy will go directly, whether sanitation and streets has the authority to implement what they interpret as mta's policies for the use of sidewalk s and streets, when it is the public right of way, do we have any say on these things at all? the curbs we are discussing, it becomes pertinent very frequently because we are talking about minute things that can effect people's lives. literally, their lives. >> so, i think you all touched upon one of the unique aspects of running the city. it is a very complicated city and there are lots of

overlapping jurisdictions. even internally. but i think what i have witnessed is that to the extent that there's any issue that effects two departments or two commissions or more then one government unit within the city and county as part of the city and county family as it were, these government units usually work it out. if there is ambiguity about one that is not amenable to a precise distinction or line drawing exercise, then it typically what happens is the department heads will get together and they'll discuss what makes policy sense and coordinate. >> can i ask-how would we know? going back to commissioner zoubi's earlier point, if we don't know and it isn't coming to us, it is like it

is-we are always reactionary and i guess my concern here is, i understand you have your reg ural check-ins with sanitation chair and we appreciate the report out, but it isn't the same as engagement and expectation and leverage one more example again, we got public comment here that really my question is, should that have gone to streets? did he miss a opportunity? this goes back to how we serve the public and how we are making sure we are efficient to our roles and possibilities and at the same time-i feel strongly about this, our citizens need to know where to go. it shouldn't be this complicated. let alone sitting at it dais having this debate. >> i guess just to your last point commissioner turner, i think with respect to the question of whether

the comments about dimensions of lip of a driveway would be in the subject matter jurisdiction of this department and this commission, the answer is yes. so, i think to the extent there is perhaps a question about frequency of street sweeping, or methods and means of street sweeping, that would be sanitation and streets issue. but i think my experience has been that when commissioners have been interested in maintenance issues or issues not squarely within the charter authority of this commission, director short and her staff are happy to share that information and to address it, and this commission has oversight over the department head, so to the extent that all of the functions that you described are-that are

within the jurisdiction of the commission of sanitation and streets, they are all implemented through this department of public works, so i think that this commission is always welcome to request information to hold hearings, to use the power of inquiry, to investigate and learn more and opine about subjects of interest to this commission. >> to clarify then, i'm not worried about setting up the system to have adequate reporting on policies and standards set by the sanitation and streets commission. we could set that up so we are fully briefed, but however, what if we don't like the policy? what if we don't like the standards? we represent the public too and we have a higher authority in this higharchy. are we sorry you should have gotten your word in earlier like any member of the

public to the sanitation and streets commission or no, we have a shot of reviewing that policy and possibly modifying it? >> i would just piggy back on again and thank you for the clarification around the role of streets and sanitation. you can't clean without money and resources so it goes back to very basic think, it seems they are missing some authority or need to come get maybe delegated authority. not sure how that works, but seems they can only do half their work. >> so, what i just heard you say mr. tom is that the-they set the policy. these micro policies. i don't want to call micro policy, because

they all very important, but standards and then i believe this is what you said, then they are implemented by us and that's exactly the opposite of what my prior understanding of this was. granted, it is limited, but-even though we pay for it, we vote on the budget, that's not exactly implementation. we set the standards, and the policy and they set the policy of how it will be implemented. that's my understanding, and then we pay for it. we say oh yeah, we like that. >> let me try to draw an analogy. i think what you

identified is certainly a puzzle. it is a puzzle, and but what is clear is that the work that-there is work that the department performs, and the department reports to this commission with respect to most of its functions and certainly with respect to its budget, but there is a certain amount of subject matter in section 4.139c that is specifically excluded from the jurisdiction of this commission, and resides within the jurisdiction of the sanitation and streets commission. i think it may not be-i think it is difficult to discus this in the abstract. i think as we encounter issues moving forward, we will work through them, and my office will provide the best

advice we can. it is certainly the case that where there are overlapping jurisdictions or questions or ambiguities that certainly occurs with respect to other commissions. that's not new and not unique. but, i think we'll work through those issues as they arise. >> interim director short. >> thanks. i thought i might give a little perspective on how i think this could practically work, and i encourage deputy city attorney tom to correct me if i'm wrong about any of this, but my assumption would be that this commission really would be relying on the director to kind of raise flags at both

commissions if anything that is being proposed-for example, if the sanitation and streets commission says, we would really like the department to look at having daily inspections of the sidewalks in high need areas and we are going to propose a resolution, i think it would be incumbent upon the director to say, commission, we appreciate that feedback. there will be budgetary implications to what you are proposing, and therefore before we pass a resolution, i think we should flag this for the public works commission, because we would expect to have to hire 50 new people to achieve that goal. conversely if the sanitation and streets commission suggest, can you assess

switching street cleaning days on this block from tuesdays to fridays based on feedback we received from the public, that isn't likely to have a budgetary impact and can be implemented by the department. i don't think that is something that needs to be raised or flagged to the public works commission. i think when deputy city attorney tom was suggesting that you give direction to the department and the department head, that person is responsible to try to insure there are not areas of conflict or to help identify them so that they can be reviewed and discussed by the commissions and there could be a joint meeting or the chairs could discuss, we want to see this happen, well, we dont have the budget for that. you can duke that out. i think fundamentally there are unfunded mandates all

the time, and the department will do the best to respond to something with a unfunded mandate if the sanitation and streets commission gave us direction that the public works commission simply couldn't fund, we would do the best we could without any additional funding, but that would be the best we could do. i don't know if that helps, but that is how i envision this working and that is similar how it works if we do have city agencies that have conflicting priorities, we meet and try to work it out and we may raise it to higher level for discussion and then we try to come to what's the best solution for the city. >> commissioner zoubi. >> thank you. that totally makes sense. if we switch it around, let's say commissioner request the public works commission says could we-we had some public reach out asking us

to change the cleaning time from tuesday to thursday and at the public works commission, now the director would come and say, no you can't do that, you have to go to sanitation? >> yes, i think that's right. if someone was coming to this commission, i think this-i'll just-editorialize for a brief moment. i think this shows how complicated the department is how much overlap there is, which-so, i think if someone came to this commission, it would be appropriate to direct them to the sanitation and streets commission if they had a question about sanitation and maintenance policies standards or procedures. >> can this-let's say--go ahead and make a motion

commissioners, second approve, it cannot happen according to chart, right? >> that is my understanding, it cant happen. the public works commission could not make recommendation for- >> or resolution. >> or resolution for policy changes specifically around sanitation and streets standards and protocols. >> can i ask with clarification, with the exception of their budget? so, that's the crux of what i want to understand is, at the end of the day, no matter what policy they make unless it is cost savings, how do they effectuate it, because-it seems that going back to the hierarchy here, i'm wondering was the intent of prop b to actually give them delegated authority from the charter or for them to make recommendations to the commission? clearly there are two commissions but

talking about policy making. or is there a point of clarification? i do appreciate we are talking in the abstract, but rubber will meet the road here and we will be dealing with this issue and so just trying to understand how we can either address it in real time and don't know if is a interpretation or it is to director short's point, it is a process lauren and the chair have to sus through and i'm okay with that too just to be transparent. >> thank you. i'm not okay with it. what i like to suggest is mr. tom you finish the presentation because i'm not comfortable taking things as they come. i don't want to wait to future commission meeting where something comes up and we have the discussion and turns out it should be with sanitation and streets. i just personally want a very-it may not be leaving the meeting today. we might want to think about it and have a working session, not a formal meeting, maybe with both

commissions, but i actually want very clear understandings for both commissions on how to go forward, not take it as it comes would be my preference. why don't you finish the presentation. >> i do have a question what director-acting interim director short comment, because it was kind of different then my understanding. if what you stated is correct, using the example of using more frequent maintenance-don't remember the specific example, and that that would have to come to us because it would require a change in budgeting, i actually would think that it wouldn't. that would come up through the department and in our operations and in our own accounting department,

and then if they can figure out if that works in the budget, then we approve it, and it goes to the mayor-the department budget and goes to the mayor's budget and city budget. i wouldn't think we would make that decision on a policy level. that would only be a matter of funding. >> if i may, what you described is correct. i think what i was suggesting is if we-if the sanitation and streets commission proposed something that is outside of the budget we have available, then i think it would be appropriate for the director to flag that for this commission prior to

the sanitation and streets commission passes resolution that would require the department to perform something we know we don't have there budget for. i think the process would then be, if this commission says yes, we think that is worth pursuing, then the department budget team would add that request to our annual budget that this commission would then approve and forward to the mayor. i think the concern--as i understand it, the sanitation and streets commission could choose to pass a resolution for us to do something that might have budgetary impacts, and then we could end up in a situation where public works commission does not feel that that is worth supporting in the budget. so, i think in a effort to have the two commissions work well together, the director could flag it and

say, sanitation and streets commission, i think there will be a significant budget impact that we cannot absorb in the existing budget. you might talk with the public works commission or direct the director to talk with the public works commission before you pass this resolution. they could say, we don't care, we want to pass it anyway. they have the authority to do that as i understand it. if the goal is to get that work done, then i think working with the public works commission to understand the budget implications would be appropriate. but you are right, if it is something we can absorb within our existing budget, absolutely there is no need to bring that to this commission, it would just be if this result in a significant addition or significant budget ask. >> can we get clarification on that point? because i would argue even if there was a line item in the budget that there is a million dollar savings, i

don't think the streets department can curate a problem-they don't have any authority. even if you any time they want to take a action that effects our budget, good, bad or in the middle how can they take it without authority? that is still my question. >> if i may, commissioner turner. i think and thank you director short. i think your comments are very astute and helpful. i think it is the case that if you look at section 4.139, and what the sanitation and streets commission duties and authority consist of,b it could be a theoretical universe in which they adopted a policy pertaining to street maintenance and protocols, and to director short's point, it could be the case that the budget does not

reflect the same prioritization that lead to the effectuation of that policy. that could be the case, but eeben if that were the case it could be said that the commission fulfilled its role. it complied with its authority and the duties under the charter to set a policy standard. and i'll add another couple layers to this. so, the budget process in the city also has involved other authorities, including the board and the mayor, so it's a very-there are many participants in that process, and the budget that ultimately results can look different from what comes

before this commission, and in addition, the board with respect to certain ambiguities in the charter language, the board could pass an ordinance that clarifies scopes. for instance, section 4.102 of the charter, which this commission has authority to implement states there are duties prescribed by the board, so the board could pass a ordinance that says, before this project is approved, it must be reviewed by the public works commission. there are requirements that could be codified in the municipal code not in the charter. that are not specifically in

the charter, but clarify the roles of this commission moving forward. >> just one more-i'm still slightly confused. so, we are all grateful for president peskin and additional funds coming into public works. if the streets and sanitation commission decided to have a hearing and without our consent decided to allocate it all to anything that is under their authority without our acknowledgment, that would be okay, because the money is there? i think what you are saying under section 4.139c, because it prescribes their duties to set policy around cleaning streets and sanitation, could they have a meeting pass resolution and say this $25 million is just going to that without our consent?

>> i'll add-answer the question by offering another maybe dynamic. it could be the case they pass resolution that does not have a legal effect. they could pass a resolution that could be a urging resolution. it could be a statement of their preference. it could be a statement of their request. but again, this is all sort of talking in the abstract. >> why don't you proceed in case there are key points because we need-at the end after we heard the presentation decide next steps. thank you. >> i this can section 4.140 is fairly straight forward. this memorializing the

merging of sanitation and streets department functions back to the department of public works and there's a clause that addresses what happens in the-to the director serving at the time that the departments are merged. that essentially states that that director would continue serving until there is a vacancy. one thing to note is that the charter does require that by june 30 of 2023, that the director submit to the board of supervisors a ordinance that amend the municipal code to make conforming changes based on these charter amendments. something to keep in mind. and if we go to section 4.141, this is the section that

enumerates the duties and powers of the public works commission, and similar to section 4.139, the previously prescribed requirements for the qualifications of the commissioners has been changed to reflect there are certain desirable characteristics and qualifications. so, now this is-we sort of discussed this-in 4.141c, this discusses the powers and duties of the public works commission, and essentially it states that with regard to the department of public works, this commission will exercise all duties and powers of boards and commissions set forth in charter section 4.102,

4.103 and 4.104 accept for the authority conferred to the sanitation and streets commission under section 4.139. and may take other actions as prescribed by ordinance. so, what was removed was there were certain previously enumerated duties on top of the authority under section 4.102 or section 4.102, 3 and 4 and that includes overseeing the department performance, approving all contracts proposed to be entered by the department, and the director proof of adequate performance of any contract. and the commission performance of annual review of the filing of department vacancies. and you

may recall that you continue to have authority under administrative code chapter 6 with respect to contracts for public works, and contracts for services related to public works projects and those contracts continue to come to you according to the delegation policy that you approved early on in the life of the commission. so, then we get into the specific enumerated powers and duties under section 4.102, and you i presented on this early on when we met, but for your benefit we can revisit those duties. so, unless there's some contrary provision

in the charter, each commission shall formulate evaluate and approve goals objecives plans and programs and set policies consistent with the city's overall objective. and then this commission shall also develop annual statement of purpose, outlining jurisdiction authorities purpose and goals, and this commission has authority to approve the budget of the department that's initiated by the mayor, and may be modified. and budget modifications or budget transfers that require budget approval. the commission can recommend rates fees and similar charges. and act on the mayor recommendation to remove the department

head. and this is a very important point, which is this commission has the authority to use its power of inquiry to investigate government operations within this commission's jurisdiction, and to make recommendations to the mayor and the board and again, this commission can exercise other powers and duties prescribed by the board of supervisors and may also appoint the executive secretary to manage commission affairs. it may take-you may take testimony and hold hearings. you may retain temporary legal counsel. and each commission is required to deal with administrative matters fully through the department head. so, that's a summary of the duties and powers

under section 4.1 o2. the language in section 4.103 and 4.104 is less broad, so section 4.103 gives the commission authority to prepare annual report describing at the commission activities and this annual report could be included in the annual statement of purpose, and this commission under charter section 4.104 has the authority to approve regulations and you have done so through the approval of bylaws. lastly, under sections 16.129 and f1.102 there were conforming changes to remove references to it department of

sanitation and streets. and there was a requirement that the services audit unit conduct-there was a removal of the requirement the service audit unit conduct annual cost and waste analysis evaluating whether their inefficiencies or waste and administration and operation of the two departments. i believe that concludes this portion of my presentation, and happy to continue our discussion. >> are thank you very much. there is a lot to digest here. i think you heard a lot of good questions and comments from colleagues. before we go to what i would like to see as next steps, which is a working session with both commissions, because i will be leaving this very dissatisfied today. i'm very confused and

remain confused. we have been up and running full time about 6 months and couple months part time i call it last summer as we got up to speed and we got to get to the bottom moving forward. especially now that our commission is fully fleshed out with 5 members. we just all need to feel very comfortable to make our meetings so much more efficient for the staff, for the commissioners, for the sanitation and streets colleagues, so this will be continued, however i did detect reaction to-from the deadline for the department to submit by the end of june the ordinance putting the charter changes that were voted on by the city last fall, submitting the ordinance to the board of supervisors and want sure if a couple colleagues had comments on that. >> chair post, you hit where i was go ing to come

back. it seems-by june 30 the director shall submit proposed ordinance amending code to conform to sections 4.13 and others. 4.139c. i assuming it is embedded there. it does seem we need to not just grapple with this but get our hands around and make a decision ahead of the ordinance passed, is that correct? >> so, by way of background, the prior proposition b had a similar cleanup ordinance requirement, so for that charter amendment, a version of a cleanup ordinance has already been introduced, and it is due to proposition b of

2022. it remains-it is held there. nothing is happening. it isn't proceeding. but, i would anticipate since i worked on that ordinance and will work on this ordinance, i don't anticipate there will be a lot of major changes that would be required to conform that ordinance to reflect proposition b of 2022. and i think it remains the case that there will be instances where there may not be a precise clarity on a certain question. just given the breath of the work that this department performs. >> so, just to clarify then, the ordinance by the end of june is more a clean up to make sure the charter amendments are absorbed properly into the city? okay. it doesn't matter what we think or don't think,

just clean up item. i understand. however, going forward, it is critical then we understand what the law is, so we can abide by it, and we can articulate it to the public in non legal language and as i said, so our work and the department's work goes much more efficiently if responsibilities are very very clear, and are then even if we might not like what we hear, at least we know that is what it is and it is sanitation and streets division. i think this will as i said, we are not over yet. commissioner newhouse segal. >> i believe that this is also going to be relevant to our transition into a permanent director, and that person i hope that person would be made

to understand that some of this is still being ironed out how we all actually going to interact and function and are that that person may have some suggestions or input about it, but it is critical now. now it is really starting. we are going to have a permanent director, we will have-we have two commissions and we will have a budget, so a lot of this is the time to understand how it is going to be implemented and know there are always questions and different ways to interpret laws, but we will try to make this clear to everybody. >> great. if i can then recap and make sure i stick with procedure since this is informational not action item. i will work with interim director short and

deputy city attorney tom to develop a workshop if you will, a study session, whatever we want to call it, that this will be the only item on the agenda, it won't be a part of the regular meetings because we have a enough for both commissions to be together and with legal counsel and interim director short and staff to hash this out. going forward, i want a one page bullet summary. that is the outcome of the discussion, one page bullet summary on what maybe two pages, a page for us and page for sanitation and streets, but i'm dead serious. i like to understand boom, boom, boom, boom, our jurisdiction and theirs. i think it is helpful for everyone. understanding life isn't like that. there will be murky areas

and maybe not clear cut but in general going forward we are all are comfortable and understand what the effects of prop b2022 are. does that seem reasonable deputy city attorney tom? to meet in a workshop or working session if you will. >> of course. >> interim director short you would participate too? >> yes. >> thank you very much. how does it sounds to colleagues as a next step? okay. i'm sure commissioner woolford would agree. thank you very much for your presentation. we can now have public comment on this item please. [providing instructions for public comment]

>> it looks like we have mr. britnor with us to speak on this item. you have three minutes to speak and you'll hear a chime when you have 30 seconds left. >> i want to thank you all for your rigor with this. this is a challenging thing. i have been get nothing to the advocacy space around this, understanding who to talk about is difficult to say the least. i started with sfmta and here today understanding there may be another commission i need to speak to. i had difficult get nothing to the building to be here points to the barriers to entry for people who

are trying to be on the front end of the space. just thank you for your work. -- >> unless there specific accessible issues. we decided to keep the option for the public to call just because we cant expect people to take time out of work day to come to city hall. in the future, we always love to see you in person, but feel free to call in. >> thank you. >> thank you for your comment.

that's our only member of the public in person who approached to speak on this item. sfgovtv is letting me know that we have one caller on the line. please unmute that caller and caller, you have three minutes to speak and i'll provide you with a 30 second warning when your time is about to expire. >> great. david pillpel, can you hear me okay? >> we can hear you. >> proving to the speaker in person that yes, you can participate from elsewhere. on this issue, some difficult and interesting questions on powers and duties under the charter. one of my favorite topics and good discussion and great different views among members of the commission. i did note the slide presentation was dated march 17. i assume it was prepared for a earlier meeting and didn't happen till now, but there was

nothing sentimentally different or wrong about the slide presentation. i think it was fine. while i think commission oversight of public works may be useful, i do think having two commissions is proving a little too cumber omsum and inefficient and gives rise to a lot of questions about jurisdiction. i support a new charter amendment at some point in the future to abolish the sas commission and assign certain specific tasks that they have under the charter now and maybe add additional members to this commission so as to have only one commission. i think having about two regular meetings a month of about 4 hours is about right for oversight of public works and i think having these two commissions now is just a little cumbersome. in terms of

functionality, i think this commission is very much a full-fledged commission with authority over the department, but the sas commission, the way i read it and the way it is seems to be working in practice is it has very limited functions and all most advisory in terms of setting street sanitation goals and things like that, so it is just a much more limited jurisdiction commission the way i read it. in terms of having a future joint meeting and further discussion, i strongly encourage you to include rachel alanzo and perhaps douglas leg, both of whom i believe were involved in the pre-and post prop b planning and discussions about jurisdiction and i think rachel in particular may have much insight to share. i'm happy to engage if that is helpful. thanks for

listening. >> thank you caller. that is our last public caller on this item. that concludes public comment. >> thank you. is there any further discussion or questions or comments on this? commissioner zoubi. >> i would like to ask for rachel alanzo to be part of the conversation. >> so noted. thank you. thank you very much deputy city attorney tom. you are not done with us yet. sorry. please call the next item. >> the next item 8 has been postponed to later meeting for the motion to postpone following role call so move to item 9. item 9 is public works director hiring update. chair post will lead this discussion and this is informational item. >> thank you. is there a slide for this that could be put on

the screen? thank you. as the slide reflects and the bullets, the search for a permanent director of pub lic works remains on schedule. right now, candidate interviews are underway for the position and as i think i mentioned before, but if i haven't i will now, the city did receive a number of resumes and applications from qualified public works professionals from around the country, and indeed some are being interviewed. as recap of the schedule, i expect that we will continue into may or june before the mayor makes a public announcement. i want to reiterate that per the city charter, all

candidates that are interviewed must be qualified by either technical training or management experience in engineering or architecture and i can attest the candidates interviewed do meet those qualifications. the charter also requires the public works commission to submit at least three qualified candidates to the mayor, and i anticipate that the public works commission will be able to fulfill that charter mandate to submit a slate of at least three qualified candidates to the mayor. if and when the mayor announces an appointment to the permanent director position to the department, at the commission next regularly scheduled meeting after the announcement, we'll provide more details on the hiring process that we went through to the public, and i

request patience from the public until that time when we can brief you. as i'm sure you can imagine and appreciate, strict -that concludes my overview and aupdate on the director hiring. any questions or comments from the commission? interim director short. >> thank you chair post. i think there was one misstatement included in your statement that i think was just a hold-over from the prior charter requirements. so, the candidates are not required to be engineers or architects. >> management experience. >> i just wanted the public to- >> i am reading a

direct quote i believe-just to be clear, qualified by either technical training or management experience in engineering or architecture is my reading of the charter. is that not correct? >> chair post, just read directly from--give me one second. thanks for

your patience. it is correct that there was language that was previously in section 4.140 that was struck and that is no longer part of the requirements, which is that it previously stated the department shall be headed by the director of public works who shall be qualified by either technical

training or management experience in engineering or architecture. that was removed. >> i see. i beg your pardon. i was looking at prior language. so, i will modify my comments to say that, per the directive and information provided by the city human relations department, that all candidates that are being interviewed for the position are qualified and meet the qualifications specified in the job description that was posted and i apologize for the confusion. any questions or comments now from the commission before we open? alright. open public comment on this item. thank you. [providing instructions for public comment]

>> looking in the chamber-wait. wants to speak on the item. you have three minutes to speak on this and there will be a chime when you have 30 seconds remaining. >> thank you. i would hope who ever is hired for the position is also asked about the familiarity with the needs of small wheel devices. appreciate the attention of this commission and the interim director and just hope we are able to see the same level of attention continue

through and hope that those unique qualifications will be asked for, even though there may not be precedent for them in the job description historically. thank you. >> thank you. and now turning to the call-in queue, sfgovtv do we have callers on the item? they are indicating we have one caller. please unmute that caller and caller, you have 3 minutes to speak and i'll provide with a 30 second warning. >> great. david pillpel again. a couple points, first of all, if i haven't done so i want to continue to appreciate publicly interim director short's continued service, which terns turns out is not short, but longer then she probably wants. she is doing a fine job as

interim director, and i'm sure she would like to go back to (indiscernible) not that she dislikes people. i also want to make a moment to appreciate the what i'm sure is a lot of time and effort that the 4 of you plus commissioner woolford are taking in closed session along with other staff and the search consultant on selecting a new director. it is not a simple or easy process to run through resumes and have interviews and thoughtful discussion, and all that and so i appreciate the time and effort there. i understand from chair post comments just now that there will be more information provided following the mayor's announcement of a new director. i continue to think that the charter does not preclude you from

making interim or intermediate announcements about the status of the search without revealing any names. as said before, not interested in names until there is a new director. i'm very interested in hearing about the status and if possible to say that you got x number of applications and you widdled down to y number of candidates and to indicate when you actually send 3 or more names to the mayor, that would increase my confidence in the process which is already pretty high but you could increase further with steps like that. again, i don't want to brief any confidentiality. i'm not interested in names until there is a new director hire said. thank you for listening and thank you for your efforts on this. >> thank you caller. that is our last caller on this item. concludes public comment.

>> thank you. please call the next item. >> item 10 is new business initiated by commissioners which is a opportunity for commissioners to raise topics to be included on a future agenda. this is informational item. >> is there any new business initiated by commissioners today? hearing none, please open public comment on this item. [providing instructions for public comment]

>> looks like we have one member of the public wishing to speak in person. you have three minutes to speak and you'll get a 30 second warning. >> i might ask there be a special appointment of a commissioner for small wheeled access, . there is precedent for this in other countries in the world. specialty to advocate such these affordances are taken into account over the long-term. thank you. >> thank you. seeing no other members of the public in person, we'll turn to the call-in number, and sfgovtv indicating there are no callers in the queue so that

concludes public comment on new business. >> thank you. i believe item 11 will be no further public comment since we did not use the full time allotted. is that correct secretary fuller? >> that is correct. >> thank you. mr. fuller, do we have remaining business? >> there is no further business on the agenda. >> alright. we will meet again on friday, may 5 at 9:30 a.m. this meeting is now adjourned. [meeting adjourned]

>> we are providing breakfast, lunch, and supper for the kids. >> say hi. hi. what's your favorite? the carrots. >> the pizza? >> i'm not going to eat the pizza. >> you like the pizza? >> they will eat anything. >> yeah, well, okay.

>> sfusd's meal program right now is passing out five days worth of meals for monday through friday. the program came about when the shelter in place order came about for san francisco. we have a lot of students that depend on school lunches to meet their daily nutritional requirement. we have families that can't take a hit like that because they have to make three meals instead of one meal. >> for the lunch, we have turkey sandwiches. right now, we have spaghetti and meat balls, we have chicken

enchiladas, and then, we have cereals and fruits and crackers, and then we have the milk. >> we heard about the school districts, that they didn't know if they were going to be able to provide it, so we've been successful in going to the stores and providing some things. they've been helpful, pointing out making sure everybody is wearing masks, making sure they're staying distant, and everybody is doing their jobs, so that's a great thing when you're working with many kid does. >> the feedback has been really good. everybody seems really appreciative. they do request a little bit more variety, which has been

hard, trying to find different types of food, but for the most part, everyone seems appreciative. growing up, i depended on them, as well, so it reminds me of myself growing up. >> i have kids at home. i have six kids. i'm a mother first, so i'm just so glad to be here. it's so great to be able to help them in such a way because some families have lost their job, some families don't have access to this food, and we're just really glad to be

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

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

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

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

in all of these cultures through all the time periods as something that is important and relevant. especially here in the san francisco bay area we feel that it's relevant to the conversations that people are having today. we hope that people can carry that outside of the museum into their daily lives.

>> he is a real leader that listens and knows how to bring people together. brought this department together like never before. i am so excited to be swearing in the next chief of the san francisco fire department, ladies and gentlemen, let's welcome, jeanine nicholson. (applause).

>> i grew up total tomboy, athlete. i loved a good crisis, a good challenge. i grew up across the street from the fire station. my dad used to take me there to vote. i never saw any female firefighters because there weren't any in the 1970s. i didn't know i could be a fire fighter. when i moved to san francisco in 1990, some things opened up. i saw women doing things they hadn't been doing when i was growing up. one thing was firefighting. a woman recruited me at the gay-pride parade in 1991. it was a perfect fit. i liked using my brain, body, working as a team, figuring things out, troubleshooting and coming up with different ways to solve a problem. in terms of coming in after another female chief, i don't think anybody says that about

men. you are coming in after another man, chief, what is that like. i understand why it is asked. it is unusual to have a woman in this position. i think san francisco is a trailblazer in that way in terms of showing the world what can happen and what other people who may not look like what you think the fire chief should look like how they can be successful. be asked me about being the first lbgq i have an understands because there are little queer kids that see me. i worked my way up. i came in january of 1994. i built relationships over the years, and i spent 24 years in the field, as we call it. working out of firehouses. the fire department is a family. we live together, eat together,

sleep in the same dorm together, go to crazy calls together, dangerous calls and we have to look out for one another. when i was burned in a fire years ago and i felt responsible, i felt awful. i didn't want to talk to any of my civilian friends. they couldn't understand what i was going through. the firefighters knew, they understood. they had been there. it is a different relationship. we have to rely on one another. in terms of me being the chief of the department, i am really trying to maintain an open relationship with all of our members in the field so myself and my deputy chiefs, one of the priorities i had was for each of us to go around to different fire stations to make sure we hit all within the first three or four months to start a conversation. that hasn't been there for a

while. part of the reason that i am getting along well with the field now is because i was there. i worked there. people know me and because i know what we need. i know what they need to be successful. >> i have known jeanine nicholson since we worked together at station 15. i have always held her in the highest regard. since she is the chief she has infused the department with optimism. she is easy to approach and is concerned with the firefighters and paramedics. i appreciate that she is concerned with the issues relevant to the fire department today. >> there is a retired captain who started the cancer prevention foundation 10 years ago because he had cancer and he

noticed fellow firefighters were getting cancer. he started looking into it. in 2012 i was diagnosed with breast canner, and some of my fellow firefighters noticed there are a lot of women in the san francisco fire department, premenopausal in their 40s getting breast cancer. it was a higher rate than the general population. we were working with workers comp to make it flow more easily for our members so they didn't have to worry about the paper work when they go through chemo. the turnout gear was covered with suit. it was a badge to have that all over your coat and face and helmet. the dirtier you were the harder you worked. that is a cancer causeser.

it -- casser. it is not -- cancer causer. there islassic everywhere. we had to reduce our exposure. we washed our gear more often, we didn't take gear where we were eating or sleeping. we started decontaminating ourselves at the fire scene after the fire was out. going back to the fire station and then taking a shower. i have taught, worked on the decontamination policy to be sure that gets through. it is not if or when. it is who is the next person. it is like a cancer sniper out there. who is going to get it next. one of the things i love about the fire department. it is always a team effort. you are my family. i love the city and department and i love being of service.

i vow to work hard -- to work hard to carry out the vision of the san francisco fire department and to move us forward in a positive way. if i were to give a little advice to women and queer kids, find people to support you. keep putting one foot in front of the other and keep trying. you never know what door is going to open next. you really don't. [cheers and

good morning it meeting will come to order welcome to april 26 meeting of budget and finance committee. >> i am supervisor connie chan. chair. i'm joined by rafael mandelman and supervisor safai. our clerk is brett jalipa.

i would like to thank paul from sfgovtv for broadcasting this meeting. mr. clerk. >> thank you. for those here silence cell phones and electronic device as to not sprupt our proceedings the board and committee are convening hybrid meetings. and providing remote access via phone. public comment will be taken on each item. those in person allowed to speak first. it is comment number is streaming across the screen you will hear discussions but muted. when your item come up and public comment is called those in person lineup those on the phone dial star 3. if you on the phone turn down your tv and listening device

each be allowed up to 2 minutes. alternateively you may submit comment in writing e mail them to myself brent. jalipa sfgov.org tell be include part of the official foil you can send it by u.s. postal service 1 dr. carlton b. goodlett place room 244, san francisco, california 94102. items acted upon are expected to parrot board of supervisors on may second. >> thank you. today we have 4 items a budget and legislative analyst report. we will have presentations and go to the bla report and then public comment. with that -- do we see director

anna here? . call item one. an ordinance appropriating 4.2 million in ambulance service ref now in the fire department the approximately 62.3 million from permanent saul rows and fringe benefits and propertying 65.4 million to over time in emergency management. opinion works. fire department. puc, sheriff's department and rec and parks department and appropriating 1.1 million of materials and supplies in the fire department to support the projected increased in over time required per code. this ordinance requires a 2 third's vote of the members of the board of supervisors. member who is are joining remeetly and wish to comment

call 415-655-0001, access code: 2592 192 7055 ##. when the system indicates you have been unmuted that is your queue to begin your comments. >> thank you. direct doony the floor is yours. good morning budget committee. you heard this item last week a number of city departments are required to come before to request additional appropriation over time if they over spends it. shifting permanent salary dollars to over time funds we added a department left week this was rec and park. and because the 2 actions they were continued to left week the bla has done a report.

any changes we can hear from them and i believe rec and park is here to address questions. good morning supervisors. nick minard the amended over time ordinance the dpw changes the d ph over time increases from 29.2 million to 30. 7 million dollars. driven by over time in general hospital and the ordinance includes rec and park department over a million dollars for over time there. there is a number of factors driving in over time they are due to vacant maintenance positions assigned repair park facilities. and winter storm damage in the parks.

>> some over time for park rangers. most of that is reimbursed by permits for the events they are covering that is not true it n all cases there are unplanned events and the park ranger over time associated with addressing public safety issues at un plaza. and around union square garage checks there. based on information by park department this over time number that is in the reimbursed for permits for park rangers. i think about 137 thousand dollars. we recommend approval. of item 1.

previously we did not have with a budget and analyst report we did in the have the break down of d ph and am now that we dom and looks like it is mainly the san francisco general hospital and partly laguna hospital. and we want them to have everything that they need. to make sure we go through this transition. rec and park an add item is when we added last week, colleagues and you know with a bit under a million dollars for the over time, i have asked for the budget and legislative analyst to look in this over time. makes sense it is because of the storm what energy today for me was the park ranger.

i do have questions on the park ranger the fact this i'm pleased to see it is only 137 thousand dollars. of that. and just want a better understanding. here i'm looking at that here unpermitted special events this is don't reimburse over time. the example given was public protests. 420. un plaza and union square. could you give a details specific low for un plaza and union square? happy to be here today. regarding union square first, the additional over time was during the shopping season from october 20th through january first. of this fiscal year. essential low 4 days per week

thursday through sunday. and the time was from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m. with 2 posts. it was 8 hours a day. >> that was at un plaza for a limited time during the holiday season. upon if we have rangers to assist we have been able to fill 55% of the spots. there are 2 posts we have and 2 p.m. through 6 p.m. of that is 7

days per week. since march 8 today. >> we have been able to fill 55% of the spots it is in the-month-old tory over time. . 2 p.m. so -- i total low understand the storm i want to make clear including seeing all the counterparts. i understand the storm factor it is unprecedented seeing the damage and given the fanatic we were off a 5 year draught. i understand, flooding and tree down requires a lot of emergency work. to keep the city safe for this i'm super grateful. i think again, the union square and un plaza appointments then you actually acrew over time

that the part where it is in the a significant amount think the question again for the city the ambassador program and deployments added together in i concentrated your in downtown and un plaza and youn square. how effective are we in that's not for rec and park to answer. i think i know sam dodge is in the here from department emergency management. i again want to direct doony to just a conversation i look forward to have with the budget to see how are we doing in spending for sort of this quasi patrolling the your with police and ambassador now the park ranger, sorry this last but in the least question. i thought the 420 event in when you say 4 tent my assumption is this is not the 420 you are

talking about in golden gate park. that is a permitted event. my assumption is you are saying 420 in general? city wide. >> yes. i do think we step up in golden gate park there is a large volume of people there during the day. and it is during the normal park range are work hour. we have park rangers there many are working are normal hours. some stay earlier or later because of the amount of people and ensure. we are talking about golden gate park? >> we have all rangers on handled throughout the city. within golden gate park we have a significant low large are amount then and there we normally would. >> i'm confused the 420 event in golden gate park their own

security? or are they hiring the park ranger for the event? >> my understanding we use rangers we tw have 25 on hand. i can't say whether or not they have their own security. >> you know sorry, clothes thank you, only buzz as a district supervisor while that is not within district 1, i want to say, i have not heard a lot of complaints about t. about the upon event itself. rich monday has understood that had is happening and find their ways to address their day. and but i want to put out there i want to do follow up eventual low to see here is i warning. warning is the park ranger especially for permitted eventses over time should be something that rec and p should go back with the permittees to

discuss. you know and about potential low over time costs. and that should be on the some agreement in advance. instead of coming back for your dollars. i know it miss become on your dollars and funds but over all

in general. thank you very much. >> seeing no, thank you. >> seeing no questions and mr. clerk let's go to public if you wish to enter the speaker line. wait until you have been unmuted and that will be your signal to begin your comments. i was here last week and tried get to the bottom of this item i was is a shame.

all people, thinking about this thing. think burglar it heard if this is something you want to do. why am i here? i will be your server going through 13 years of going on to serve to you be here for you. is this it? that's what it looks like to me. so. we have no speakers in the queue. >> thank you. mr. clerk. public comment is closed. >> clothes i like to make the motion, do we have i assume we

don't have more amendments? to this item. we make amendments necessary. director doony before i move this forward. want to conif he were all the dollar amount is reflected and accurate? no more changes to this? great. >> clothe fist this is okay i like to make the motion to move this item to full board with positive recommendation. with that mr. clerk call the roll. on the motion to forward to full burden vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> member safai. >> aye. why chair chan. >> aye. >> thank you, the motion passes. and mr. clerk call item 2 >> item 2 a resolution authorizing major's office through ino vision to accept gift consulting services have youed at 739,000 from providers

from may third through august 18 of 2023 in connection with the civic bridge program. members remote and wish to comment call 415-655-0001, access code: 2592 192 7055 ##. when the system kcets you have been unmuted you may comment. >> thank you, today we are sofia, director from major's on whiches of innovation here. thank you. >> good morning. thank you members i'm sofia, director of mayor's office of innovation i have i presentation but i don't know how to get it up there. behested payment's legislation to allow you to seek partnerships for the civic bridge program. we are back today with 5 of those projects and five partners

of those -- only one takes advantage. behested payment waiver with adobe and the san francisco airport. adobe has a contract with department of technology for the entire city. mr. clerk can you help me get this presentation on line? we have 5 projects with the office economic and workforce development. office of transgender initiatives. department of planning, the san francisco airport with, don'ty and the digital equity initiative for ocd. [inaudible]. this is the first time we come

to you with nonretroactive this will start once the board of supervisors has approved it. i'm happy to share details about the projects if you have specific questions the amounts is based on assumption of 6 individuals per team working 16 weeks at 20% time at 195 dollars per person. that's how we come to the number before you. we are still finalizing recruitment. whether or not we use up to aim we don't have confirmed whether there will be 6 people on each team. special then this is our first time not retroactive. each project deliverable chosen projects we believe is day for that department and transferred across other insights for other projects that across the city and all of the proposals

evaluates and approved by committee including the committee on information technology, digital service of course data sf and the controller's office. it say this is is on behalf of the major's office of innovation the funds will be sent to the respective departments not the mayor's budget we are are the convener. i'm happy to answer questions. >> thank you. i think so -- the 5 projects. >> yep. >> what are their term lines >> all of them move as a cohort. we will kickoff once we have approval from the board of sprierdzs we sign a final grant agreement and hope to kickoff may third assuming approval next week. and it is a 16 week project. we will be finalizing in.

looks like all the 5 and you know i am going to take item 5 which is the visual equity initiative. and so are you supposed to recruit the 6 people. i thought that the firm themselves offering consultance. matches with departments and once we agree on the partnership the firm guess out within their team and recruits the 6 people willing to dot work.

>> great. the sick people is coming from the firm. >> exactly. i'm not against all like so here is also then with that, all the consulting service will this be a training componentful witness they develop the data base. looks to me it is saying we're creating the data base. this one does say skilled training provide eshs dig at that time lit res for the program. it is building out something for us. but then how do you do a hand off. >> they work close low. not just the firm is off by themselves doing work. they have at least weekly check in's if is a collaboration the pro bono partner can work with the department they learn how government works we learn how they work temperature it is a partnership hay work together

the entire time a kickoff and hand off in the example of the dig at that time initiative what they build out is a training model to take what ocd has done. i believe it came out of a civic bridge project with sales force in the past and creating something we replicate across cities. this it is a design project of how we take the lessons of something ocd wing on and done a good job and rebelicate it other departments and cities and be a digital champion across the united states. why here is the question. too. and may be the city attorney can help answer this. for example. item 3 the planning and center. and will design a blueprint for

integrated data bills for shared paces and program. this project will feature real time build of the data base designed by staff. say we continue to build this out. part of it the city willune time will then end up. we need to go for rfp for i don't know build something out. data base and so what will happen in the situation in the event say for example that the planning department say we now need to go for a contract and build out. not just shared spaces or however way the department decided. and what will happen with a company like that that already have been volunteering themselves. donated service. how do we bridge that? >> they would --il would defer at this time city attorney. i would expect that they would then having designed the project

would be limitations on ability to sponld to the rff. we have selected for this should advance. it does not build data base. we would be look to more of an it type infrastructure, i think for that. i don't want to speak out of turn. we try to make sure and hands it to the department we want to make sure they are impelementable won't want to hand off and it is a good question in the context how an rfp a consideration wlo if they would bid if they would be considered.

i think this is built in the agreement and we are not look to looking for opportunity. jowl let her hang that that. >> and 5 minutes you v should stop her and say. wait. >> do not worry thank you for answering that question i appreciate that. that is helpful i don't see other questions on the roster. if members who wish to speak are joining person lineup.

for those remotely press star 3. get train to people it is worth 740 thousand dollars. all the tech people are training the mayor's office >> that is going on. who is behind this! why are you doing this? why are you doing this. hum? do we know why, why? you know what i mean.

we have to figure it out here. you know. can this be done anybody else? with this ever be thought of done to anybody else? this is people are isolated during covid. i don't know, no way can i covid. no, no, over, over. >> look had is going on in this case. okay seeing in spoeshgs.

mr. lam unmute our caller, please. mr. decosta:supervisors y'all are making a mockery of this meeting. and as far as the presentation, and the woman taking a difficult platform and the role of sales force, i think we need a freedom of information act on this one issue. because when we incorporate behest payments, we need to have

the input from the ethic's commission. and not the other way around. so from the ethic's commission to the controller's office to the budget analyst and then the supervisors. not the other way around. let me state, this is a most corrupt city in america. and when it come to behested money we know what is habbing with this city. we have to review this. and this matter has to be tabled so that the digital plat furthermore and see who was involved with it in the past. i know of one person who is

involved in the past because create the platform. and then find out how we will go forward. investigate the situation. thank you very much. >> thank you francisco decosta for your comments. do we have more speakers. this completes our queue. >> thank you. mr. clerk, and seeing no comment, public comment is closed. voice chair mandelman. >> thank you, i like to thank the office for their fine work on this in general to get had set up and like to be added as a cosponsor. >> thank you. and with this would you like to make a motion? i will move we forward to the board with positive recommendation. >> thank you. and mr. clerk, call the roll. why on this motion vice chair mandelman this be forwarded to the full burden with positive recommendation vice chair

mandelman. >> aye. >> member safai. >> aye. >> chair chan. >> aye. why we have throw aye's >> thank you the motion passes and -- thank you and mr. clerk call item three. >> item 3 is a resolution authorizing the department of public health accept and spend a grant increase 2 ton,000 from the united states d. health and human services office of population affairs through access health an amount of 301,000 for participation in program, title x family planning program for the period of april first of 22 through march 31 of 23. members had wish to comment call 415-655-0001, access code: 2592 192 7055 ##.

we have an approximate presentation from jenny lopez from d. public health this is virtual? let's go. good morning i'm jenny lopez the health coordinator for the [inaudible] section we are requesting accept and extend i grant in the amount of 221, 725 dollars for program calls tiling 10 planning program. the funding from essential access health will support the family planning program to mote the needs of the community. >> through the family planning program d ph provides reyou can

prosecutive health service. the service include, active to high quality patient center counselling and chrome, pregnancy testing. referral for term nigz if desired or prenatal care. procreative counselling and screening service lab tests, vaccines and coloneledoms, allowables, emergency contraception and prep. >> the family planning program collaborates with population health, proirm care. community health programs for youth and other program its address reproduct of needs and challenges. the program also works to provide quality reproductive health care service its unhoused clines in addition to others. this grant does in the require an amendment to annual salary ordinance and partial low

reimburses the department for 4 existing positions and training expenses and materials. thank you for your time. we request retroactive approval to accept and extend this grant increase i'm available for questions. seeing these are saul rows and wages and just a quick question. what is the number of people serve on the program? at this time we have 50% vacancy rate in the program and we are not able to serve all of the clients. i can follow up with you. i can follow up with this group to inform them the number we should expect it serve once the approximate suspicions are filled. >> got it.

>> so. a retroactive grant? >> retroactive? this is i grant retroactive from april first 2022. but what you are saying is that it is not fully staffed? >> right. >> the program has not been fully staffed for almost 2 years retroactive number would be close to an average to 5-800 clients. sorry. how many? you say 5-800. like 800 clients. >> 500 to 800 clients. a retroactive grant for the time period in april of 22 and you are saying it is in the fully staffed and therefore has not been active and you have not

been serving clients? >> my apologies. we have been serving clines but not all the numbers that we could. if we have all the positions filled. >> understood. and we are currently we should have one major position filled within the next 30 days. >> and then so what have your capacity been. are you silling that with the full -- if we retroact everly receiving this grant and you will be at what capacity, 800? >> at least. >> at least. >> thank you. i appreciate it. >> let's go to public comment. thank you. members who wish to speak are joining in person lineup now. for those joining remote press star 3 to enter the line. for those in the queue wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted then comment.

sir? >> this is a key here. so -- title 10, the d. public health is getting the health department is getting 200,000 increase. this is a family planner. family planner. think about this. there is somebody a planner. planning a family. what does this mean. anybody can come in your house and plan it for you. somebody there was not there yesterday. why? to embarrass you >> make you small. make you turn into a dog. who are you? you are big, number one the 1 you are not. not in america. you got a planner planning your family. this health department is getting money to plan more

families. you know -- this is a strange situation. got a strange situation. come in the light this has to come in the light. we have to find out what is going on? you know. i want him it see me. that's had she said. right up on webster safe way. a woman white woman starts walk nothing my direction i'm in the car. she saturday planner who are you. you know what i mean.

d ph. i'm with you. all right. thank you. no one else in the chamber. madam chair well is then in the queue >> thank you seeing no more comment it is now closed. i have feeling busy this retroactive item. that has been so long since april but i do understand this the rateo acttivity do you to the project that was determined by u.s. d. health and human services. let's i move to make this move make the motion to move this item to full board with recommendation. >> on the motion to forward this resolution to the board with positive recommendation vice

chair mandelman. >> aye. >> member safai. >> [inaudible]. >> chair chan. >> aye. >> member safai. >> absent. we have 2 aye's with member safai absent. jot motion passes. and -- thank you and mr. clerk go to call item 4 >> yes. item for you a regulation lugz approving amendment 3 with asian and pacific islander wellness center dbi san francisco community health center and d ph for mobile delivery care and services to severe needs and special populations living with hiv/aids in san francisco to increase by 5.5 million not to exceed 50.2 million extend the term by 3 years for a term of

may first of 2017 to february of 2027. and authorize d ph modifications to the contract prior to the final skoougz execution by parties not materially increase obligations or liabilities to the city. members are yoining remote and wish to comment call 415-655-0001, access code: 2592 192 7055 ##. had you have been mute third degree is your significant medical to begin your comments. today we have beth assist uponant director if hiv health services. and bill, director from hiv services from d ph with us today. the floor is yours. thank you. >> i think you have a presentation? >> we do and i believe it is up

the instructions we got is the clerk could play them? >> good morning great to here. we will take a broef moment to give you over vow of the services being provided. >> so just a large are vow to show you we -- san francisco has 15,000 people living with hiv less than half services are funded through d ph/hiv services less than half. you see on the left there are all different organizations that we funds. to be clear more service for hiv help in nonhiv specific. gives you a sense where we exterior what we do to support the community to provide

services. on your right you see 3 of the funding source that drive the w this we do. on the bottom it it is this local getting to zero. and through local general fund and of course we are supported by a lot of other general funds as well. those are services and how they are funded and locate exclude how they are funded. so what i want to share here is the range of service categories that are define by federal funder hiv/aids bureau. 16 are up there there are 22/23 but wanted to fit them in. i believe this should pop and up show us those that are funded by the service category. we have a fancy slide set did in the work 3 of those would light up you see where it works. we can go on to the next slide.

so here you can see the 3-4 programs that are funded. home 3 and 4 in your packet are come biened is one program we see them in 1 and 2 programs n. middle category, the population served. and in the bottom category the service categories will give you a sense of the different programs here. i did also want to draw your attention to the top there double stars. ap i wellness opened a second drop in center on transcommunity near pine street. you see up there a new space 7,000 square feet. if you have not seen it. i would going to see it. >> this is thank you we agree with the bl arecommendations and

we request this you approve the proposed resolution as amended. thank you. >> thank you. item 4 is a resolution approve the third amendment to the department of public of health grant agreement with asian pacific island are wellness center increased 15.2 million dollars. extends the existing agreement through february of 2027. and so this grant funds a range of hiv care management and out roach it low income people living with hiv prirm low in the tenderloin neighborhood. we reviewed assessments of the contractor's performance and financial condition, and in general we don't see major issues with the condition tract of performance. their financial condition was hearder to assess because of they are late and delivering

rent financial statement. which was for the fiscal year that close in the march of 22. but for the as of them most recent statement d ph revows march of 2021, you know the department did not see, they were in good financial condition. sufficient. cash cushion to meet there are obligations. so -- and d ph rates had as a moderate risk and feel like which means they near good financial condition and close low moned because of things like the delay in sending out financial statement. the department believe this is you know the provider is -- kind of taking steps to address. you know the causes of that late deliver include hiring more financial staff.

>> with the skills. so -- i think we felt comfortable rmdzing approval of the extension. we show the budget for this on page 21 of our report. 1.6 million dollars a year and would be funded by federal funds. >> i do have i quick question. here it says city provides sick options to renew for a period of one year each through february 2027. and so with that does this mean every time we renew that you do come become to the board for approval? or allowing a time period or allowing a conversation between the ap i wellness and the department of public health and evaluate the operation and delivery results. >> what is the decision behind do a 6 options.

>> right. when we wrote it we usually have an initial term long are then and there a year to start. and to give the most flexibility and chance of reconsideration further down up to 10 years this is visible we allow it to renow a year this time we are exercising all options we're can have the that we expect should go well and only if something would go wrong we come back here. >> i think that is smart. i think i wanted the opportunity to evaluate at this time conversations, right. you want to whoness. sometime it ises not you. the organization themselves like transition. different leadership or something helps. you want this opportunity to be able to have a conversation whether it is working well for the people we serve am thank you and i was was not laughing at you but with you of course you agree with the recommendation the recommendations in the bla

is to approve. thank you very much. and thanks for your presentation today. seeing no questions and no name on the roster mr. clerk, let's go to public comment. >> thank you. members who wish to speak and joining person line up nouchl for those remote dial 415-655-0001, access code: 2592 192 7055 ## and press star 3. for those in the queue continue it wait until you have been unmuted and begin your comment. no in person speakers here. and we have no one in the queue. >> great. thank you very much, and seeing mow public ment it it is now closed. >> and mr. clerk i would like to move this item to full board with positive recommendation and with that roll call, >> on that motion to forward this resolution to the full board with positive recommendation vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> member safai. >> aye >> chair chan. >> aye. >> thank you, the motion passes

and mr. clerk call item 5. >> item 5, is an ordinance waiving the contract requirements of the administrative code for tenant improvements by a port tenant for port loses approved by the port commission and board of supervisors. members joining us and wish to comment call 415-655-0001, access code: 2592 192 7055 ## and press star 3 to enter the queue. a prompt the indicate you ridzed your hand when you have been unmuted you begin comments. >> thank you, and today we have a presentation by rebecca. from the port of san francisco. thank you and good morning. as chair chan said i'm deputy director for real estate and development an exemption for

select tenant manage construction from chapter 6 contracting requirements. we have a number of vacancies at the port the pandemic hit our restaurant and retailers hard. the map indicates for you locations we have which are port managed and vac an you in we will seek tenants and indicated other locations that are closed and upon restaurants that are closed. this is i bit of context the second we did receive economic recovery dollars. we have dollars to spend that are targeted to recruiting tenants. finding new tenant and react i having space. it is tough the retail market is risk and he without the changes where we funnel the dollars to the 10 hadn'ts to make improvements up front capitol would be required for businesses trying to open. and that would make it have another barrier for small businesses trying to make it in

this environment. the rational for the waiver is it will allow the port to be competitive. we are hearing left-hand side lords are fitting out spaces and getting them turn key ready or creating tenant, allowance dollars. reduce barriers for small businesses allow you to change higher market rent. sufficient for the tenant they fit it to needs. and lastly it increases the volume we provide we don't have enough staff to manage these projects it helps vol tomb of the if enacted well are checks in place. first only loses that come to the port and the board with this tenant improvement dollar and mechanism embed would be allowed use this money we get an opportunity to approve at public bodies. and also the property

improvements must for economic recovery allow it to open and gent rit to the port. and also the total amount for this waiver cannot exceed 20 million dollars how much we think the outside amount we would have in our tenant improve am dollar funds. with that i request your enactment of the ordinance and thank board president peskin's office for asisterance with the ordinance. >> thank you. >> voice chair mandelman. >> thank you. i think this is smart. i thank the port and our board president for take the lead and like to be added as a cosponsor. >> thank you. i have a question. so you know i seeing that this is the 10 not improvement allowance fund. right now i'm looking at the 10 million dollars from the feds at the federal rescue plan act

funds this is is remaining the 10 million dollars and another 10 million dollars from the port harbor revenue funds other monies you miff. and the waiver is chapter 6 apply to this act. and of course it is in the waiving the 9.118 it has to in back for lose agreement. the question is the moment that if the 20 million is deleasted, we go through it and now we have a tenant in making improvements and everything is great. works out. and does the waiver apply or like if you end up deciding to funds you know the tenant improvement allowance fund. does the waiver continue in no this , is in the our intention. in a happy day we had extra day but unlikely we have to ask for a different waiver.

would be to that dollar amount when we are approving not to exceed amount of 20 million. first 20 million have another 20 million for other tenant improvement you need to come back for chapter 6 if you need be you will come back another chapter 6. why correct. >> thank you i want to clir foil that on the record and i for my personal clarification. thank you and does in the have a bla report let's go to public ment. why members who wish to speak and joining person line up now. for those remote press star 3 to enter the speaker line.

i'm trying to understands here the port the port -- [inaudible]. i was there in 2013 and lately i'm think burglar it. my last week in ethiopia in 2013 i was going down, i don't know the neighborhoods i remember the light. the trees. the buildings and by a hotel. a ross hotel there. and i was there and it is that is what is coming become to me. you know if i would have been there all the time i would have been a father. and have been had something.

the port wants to lose to the board of supervisors. and so heard to understand. when is going of what is going on, you know? big head is had they called mow in school. hey, big head.

i turn around. yea. >> that's what i did. >> thank you for your comments, mr. lamb unmute our caller. >> david pilpel:. i support the legislation and i'm comfortabling with items 6, 7 and 8. there is no charter section 9.118 delegation here this is very different from the mohcd item on monday. at land use. this item is about waiving certain admin code chapter 6 requirements for specific purposes. this also does not change or wave any charter section 9.118 port merry time loses are already exempt from 9.118 subfee. by the language. and just one mall item on the

legislation itself on page throw, the end of section 2c line 5, the sentence, port commission retains discretion. i dent see a, period. you may want to add a, period, at the end of line 5. i'm supportive of this item and thank you to port staff and others for work on this. thanks for listening. thank you difdavid pilpel for your comments and madam chair that completes our queue >> public comment is now close said. >> i would like to move move? >> sure i will move this to the board with positive recommendation. >> and i'm sorry mr. clerk call the roll. on this motion. offered by vice chair machine man to forward this ordinance to the full board with a positive recommendation. voice chair mandelman.

>> aye >> member safai. >> aye >> chair chan. >> aye. >> thank you the motion passes. >> >> waivers of specified contract requirements in the administratid code for electricity approximate related product transactions. investor utilities and increase the annual limit for energy procurements from 150 million to 200 billion of members who are joining remote and wish to comment call 415-655-0001, access code: 2592 192 7055 ##. and enter the meeting id. once connected press star 3 to enter the line. a prompt will indicate raised your hand. when you have been unmuted you

can begin your mentes. >> thank you. and today we have barbara hail assist an general manager for purfrom puc. . thank you, chair chan. barbara hail for manager for power. jot proposed ordinance modified the authority the board approved last july. section 2143 delegateed the puc authority to execute contracts for the purchase and the sale of electricity and related products. >> support support our hetch hetchy and cleanpowersf program. hetch hetchy has 4500 accounts related products this are needed to serve the customers

ourselves. we do purchase electricity to meet needs when we are not gent ritting and we sell generation and related product in excess of customer needs from the hetch hetchy hydro system we own and operate. hetch hetchy budgets and includes in financial plans projected 30 million a year for the purchase of electricity and products over the next several years. for cleanpowersf program, we serve about 385,000 customer accounts. purchase most products needed serve those customers through bidding process and cell electricity and related products. cleanpowersf budget and financial plans project 300 to 320 million i year for purchase of electric and related products over the next several years. together, the retail programs

provide 70% of the electricity this is consume in the san francisco today. section 2143 authorizes the general manager it use form contracts for this purwhich is approximate sale i described under limited continues for 3 years. and execute contracts with terms greater than 10 years or requiring expend tours of 10 million or more the limitation the annual expenditure not exceed 150 million. within anticipated ref now in excess of a million, or more subject to annual revenue lim of 10 million per year. now the proposed ordinance. the expenditure limit for power purchases under 21 frefrom 150 million it 200 million per year. and contract requirements not

standard in the industry. and foible low the proposed ordinance delegated the authority to enters in contracts for electric products required for come mroins with state mrau this include binding arbitration provisions with the utilities. the success of our power program requires the stele to prit and act at a commercial pace. now more than ever. the market is volatile. fast move and competitive the requirements are fluid. we indicated left year we might need to come back to increase the annual limit if we were say seeing increase in market power, power market prices. and we presented to you. on other items this we are seeing that historic volatility. in electric and markets is upon us. market price volatility rused

hold process in our solicitations for the amount of time required to obtain commission and board approvals. we are asking you increase the expenditure limit section 21 freif 150 to 200 million per year. that authority will help both of our power programs obtain the supplies we need to serve customers and compliance with state luat the commercial pace the market requires. we have included additional waivers of certain contract related city requirements that are not used in the industry standard form agreements you authorized us to use in 2143. these city terms are not in the form contract ouzed boy california utilities. and we often do business with them. they hold a significant amount of the power supply resources in the state.

last year the standard form contract. finds everbierndzing arbitrations as a nonnegotiableable term. >> we respond to request the competitive and need to conform our bids to their form contract. the board has previously authorized the puc general manager to execute contracts for compliance with state law that include the binding arbitration provisions this would incorporate that delegation of authority to the puc general manager into sension 2143. 2143 provides with limited delegated authority for power supply contracking. this authority helps us move quickly and acquire the most cost effective power supply resources to meet the regular requirements we face. it ensures we have products to

sell when we have products to sell, we act the a commercial pace to achieve the best process for customers. we do have in amendments that we also would like to read in the record. at the request of deputy city attorney. on page one line 21. we remove an extra, and correct the citation to the previous ordinance. should read 2227-18. and on page 3 lines 22 and line 24, we need to add and/or renowable portfolio standard. it lists ra and needs to add renewable portfolio standard. with that. i'd like to ask for your support

and i'm happy to take questions you may have. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> item 6 is an ordinance that amends chapter 21.free of the administrative code to make changes to it. it increases the aim of expend tours annual that he the puc may enter in contracts without coming to the board of supervisors for approval. from 150 million dollars iier to 200 million dollars. those are power contracts that were described. the ordinance also expands the set of code waivers that would be portions of the code theory waived for those contracts. and those are the compensation ordinance. upon and public access to meeting and records of nontracts

and foodservice waste reduction. well is an existing set of code waivers that were approved by board of supervisors and allows puc to enter in contracts with binding arbitration. so this is we consider approval of this ordinance to be a policy matter for the board. it is waiving the board's sthrt to approve power contracts and waiving portions of the code that have been approved boy the board of supervisors. it does in the change the sunset date. rein main june of 2025. in terms of for yous the increase from 150 to 200 to some extent we discuss third degree already in the ap x power scheduling condition transact and detailed the reasons for the increase and cost of power.

and you know there was a discussion last year about the need to move quickly and enter in the contracts without coming to the board for approval. and approval of the 2143 but we consider approval to be a policy matter. >> thank you. i want to clarifyism think the previous waiver of the chapter 2143, like a waiver that which allows us that when the board approved. firemember correct low it is in the for the purchase of energy products. it it is was specific low for the construction.

the previous ordinance the board approved was for the term the delegation of 9.113. and 8. and then which is in the upon reference here is the 227-818 we had the discussions.

there was not a waiver or was there? >> the waivers are listed in 2043. and the ordinance before you you see them listed there on page 3. those other waivers. and in this item we are requesting the addition of -- 5 more. >> yea >> and so and the reason being, again. i know that you kinds of say, hey it is in the standards with the industry. explain to me again like you know. i get it that you are saying, hey. no one else does it. but the investor own utilities you are working with and buying the products from. do not have the same standards of course. i understand this.

but i think that is the questions. right. like. that is part of the reason why we have the upon ordinance so we impose standards with the people we do business with. . help me understand why we are waving that. it it is a policy decision. i need a bit more explanation. >> and i think appreciate the pause. you are asking you to take and be thoughtful about this. so the upon context we are working in is -- you wean issue rfp for long-term commitments. we are construction helps and those scenario we are in a stronger position to require city provisions and we do. what we are talking about for these scenario the waivers are most needs are when we make shorter term purchase.

not typically. power that has been that not typically contracts cause new projects to be constructed. often times our counter parties can be brokers who are beand telling and not owners. and in this case, with respect to binding ashtrician and this waiver we asking the investor owned utilities they are in charge of the solicitation we are responding to their solicitation. and they are publishing their form contract and say figure you want to do business with us these other terms. take it or leave it. >> that's the dynamic where we are using the waivers most. when we are in charge of the solicitation and it it is for long are term commitments where especially where we are having construction happen. we near a stronger position. supervisor. to make sure we meet the city's

objectives and goals this are through the differents provisions. and would be -- much less likely exercising the authority to wave. i am -- in the position i think the bl assay this is is a matter for the board to disguise. i'm in the position to agree to -- the increase of dollar amount. previously they did come proposed with 750 million. 150 million dollars per year until 2028. i think we rolled become to 2023 want to have an upon bedding. in this agreement is i believe a quarter low report on the purchases. which they already submit to the

puc their commission. and in the same term it is submitting to the board. i do believe i seen report. i think one or 2, that agreement you are exercised. and i appreciate those report. i don't see any questions on names on the officer and there is no questions go to public comments now. >> thank you, members who wish to poke in person line up now. for those remote press star 3. will oftentimes puc wants to procure expenditure limit from 150 million or 200 million.

you know i come here and i have a certain like i have i'm suddenly like in a different state now i'm i don't know what i my ice hurt or ears heard. but i have clearly i'm a different personful i don't know. is it coming tomorrow. i don't know. listen 150 million dollars is a lot of money. you know a lot of money. you puc is i big agency. big, big agency. you know so -- a big agency. a scary agency they intimidate you. and that's when they dom that's what people on the street do. want to scare and you come up here and tuck they don't want you to say anything they want you to shut up. and let us do our thing.

and we will come around and give you money when we feel like t. it is their attitude. makes you scratch your head. you have the people on the street. and your house and cars coming around with engines that -- finally! i stopped and i thought about what the engines are doing and the engine it some power it can what it does is it shuts your brain down. shuts it down. that's when engines do. where i live outside. you cannot hear anything. shut its down. the duration the engine is run and making noise your minds is blank. it is black. >> thanks. and no further speakers here in the chamber. we have no speakers in the

queue. >> so. thank you, seeing no more dmenlt is closed. supervisor safai. >> i just want to have an opportunity to ask on the record i then and there there is we have begin you this authority. explain it in the record the difficulty in meeting some of the administrative code provisions and how this inhibits your ability to work in the open market in case than i want it on the record. and 12x you know don't have to reference this. why happy to give color. barbara hail assistant general manager for power. we finds ourselves in the market soliciting power every week. very frequently. we receive bids. we receive bids from bidders that are good for very limited

windows. very limited -- i mean 15 minutes or less and received bids this say we are interesting here is our price now. if you want to talk with us -- and further -- the price will be different. any amount of time means that some of these bidders will move on to another counter party and we lose our opportunity. and i think that when we brought 2143 forward. >> we provide those examples. . [talking over each other]. had goes in the contract in when have you seen when you do sign the contract relating to some of the goal and objectives we put in our administrative code, in practice. why long-term condition tracts we include i think almost every

single one of our provisions i think there are perhaps -- with respect to hardwoods. mc bride prince pels some of those provisions have been waived. city -- requirements are include. >> most of the time it is we are purchasing energy this is in the a physical prushth or anything physical it is the ability to buy energy on the open market and the infrastructure is there. trans mitted to our demand. >> we are giving you the authority to do a graduated set of things what happened when you are not buying energy. how is this utilized. >> 2143 we can as adopt in the

july, we can procure power on the longer term basis. where that commitment to purchase results in the construction of a project. in those circumstances. >> it is the entity itself this might have to construct. >> that's right. we would not be the protect owner owner we are pay are for the performance of -- production. we rescue noise the fact that we have signed a commitment. allows this protect to get the needs and the approvals it meesd and demonstrates they are a viable project to the california iso so they get connected to the

grid. it is i evacuate aspect of the transaction for the counter party the project minot get built without us. we have more leverage and include more of our city terms. in the contract. are they almost 100 percent of the time in california. >> yes, or first point of connection is california. right we have done energy storage. and we talked a bit about you know -- some of goals of labor standards and local contracts and community benefits all those things. do you have examples of the since we begin you the authorization you have examples of projects realized not purely purchasing energy. >> i don't have it off the top of my head. condition transacts we

negotiated together. with california community power. that the board, proved. so that is in the entirely exercising the same authority. we do have a contract coming forward that has in the been signed yet the general manager will exercise this authority. buzz it has not been signed yet i should in the disclose that yet. than i are coming. where projects are constructed and include men of our city standard provisions >> have we seen or will we see because now well is more competition and in the relying on one source for energy. have we seen the rates come down for consumers? >> we are -- make sure our costs

are low as possible. this is absolutely an important component. i think that it is an escalating market so i would not -- i would not -- say we see the cost of power come down as a result of waivers. >> i guess when i'm asking. this will be my last question. i'm asking is we had a market that was a monopoly and purely pg and e. now we expanded and cleanpowersf and puc in the market buying power. electricity and the customer base has a choice with to stay with pg and e or come over to clone clean unless you are i municipal building you have no choice then it is cleanpowersf with this have you seen the

competition work for the consumer? >> yes we have seen it in the market work for the consumerism think a good example is the fact the investor owned utilities who never had renewable product offerings in the past have them you in this cleanpowersf and other aggregation programs exist. i think the come petitive precious there on the retail side of service prosecute vision. yes. >> thank you. >> appreciate the interest in the items. >> i think supervisor made a good point and i question that asked i want to add it to this. so in the events that when we buy products so to speak you have to require someone to construct product in order to perform the delivery of the electricity. and so the waiver a minimum compensation ordinance and heck

accountability ordinance and the sweat fro of contracting and so the waiver that you are requesting today. in the upon event this there is labor. involved and to perform construction. with the waiver we have today. then who that bidos it will not comply to the compensation ordinance and health care ash countability ordinance and sweat free contracking. i get it we want to be competitive. i think that guess become to like all the conversations we are having. we are undoing some of the like we set the minimum compensation

or health care or sweat free never because we know this these requirements cost us money. like we knew that. like we knew that the all the things that it creates additional cost to doing business in san francisco with san francisco. i was never -- it is because we believe the value of labor. values of our workers this they therefore we have them. and what you are asking us to do today is wave it so we be more competitive. so i have challenges. with this. vice chair mandelman. i'm i may be wrong about this. and may be -- i thank you is an a -- i have my grave interest in stream lining the presses and

but i don't think is in this category. if we want to buy this stuff --. respondent to solicitations and there is no space in this to buy this energy and -- go through the compliance requirements we would with normal contracts. we have done we general low have to get the waiver when is we buy power. >> i don't think it is -- don't think it it is as bad. if the repeal of 12x is bad. i think this this is in like a different category. may be. so if i may. responds to the dialogue this is helpful. i think the area where we will ask our general manager to make take these waiver steps you are giving him authority to take. are where we are in a situation

where we don't have other options. for example, the investor owned utilities for decades had a monopoly on service. they had long-term contracts and other condition transacts with counter parties. and when the cca and movement began they stared lose the retail custody norse whom those kilowatt hours were going to be sold. they still hold the contract and have the supply. and they don't have the customers to serve. we do. >> so they are out in the market with their form contracts. saying we will sell you this power only under these terms. this is the scenario where we are looking for the full compliment of wifrs to be dperzed. this is the condition transact if we don't agree to their terms. we are not going to get this power.

>> so. i appreciate the quarter low report. i will appreciate with this quarter low report in the upon events you do wave. you know these you do exercise the waiver of minimum compensations and health care. i love to have a note of that that hey. we irrelevant and i understand because it is i competitive market. i'm in a space i want to increase the dollar amount and rescue noise we near a unique space i love the additional information in the report had so we can understand to what extent this is helping. i appreciate that. is it public to have this commitment? why we and provide waiver information for you. yes. >> about just the labor waiver in terms of nco and health care and sweat free. with that, thank you.

>> thank you. >> sorry. >> thank you. >> sorry. >> my apol gees. thank you i appreciate this with this -- anybody would like to make a motion in xouz mow we have amendments, first. >> no worries. >> yes. i will make the motion to amend. that was read out loud with the page one line 21 to remove and page 2 line 4 that is correcting the citation the reference of it 227-18. and then page 3 line 22 and line 24 is to add the reference of renewable portfolio standards. with that, i would like to make the motion to amend and please call the roll. >> on this motion to amend as

read by the chair vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> member safai. >> aye. >> chair chan. >> aye. >> thank you. i will move we forward the amended ordinance to the full board with positive recommendation. >> excuse me. i'm -- continue it for a week. >> my bad. i make him move motion to approve. thank you, i will make the motion to continue to one week. >> that's all we need and we will be next week. we prebl don't need tower come become for presentationment to let you know. and with this the megz to condition to next budget and finance committee hear with this call the roll. >> on this motion to continue this ordinance to the may third meeting as amended vice chair

mandelman. >> aye. >> member safai. >> aye. why chair chan. >> aye. where we have 3 aye's >> motion passes. call item upon 7. >> item 7 is an ordinance exempting from requirements of the add stritive code to end the environment code 2 agreements with puc and california department of transportation for professional services for sewer and improvement and afurthermoring the department's determination. members of public joining wish to comment call 415-655-0001, access code: 2592 192 7055 ##. and meeting id is 259219270 five. a prompt will indicate you raised your hand. >> thank you we have a verbingal

presentation by suzanne? wang. project manager from puc. thank you for being here. >> good morning i'm suzanne wrong project manager per the water improve am project and joined boy my colleague bari adams project manager of water improve am project. we request approval of an ordinance that would exempt 2 agreements with cal trans. currently both al men and he folsom project are in design phase with now puc facilities with property on the cal-trans jurisdiction. under state law cal-trans is required engineering, construction and technical reviews for the elements within the jurisdiction. >> in order to perform the

review puc must enter in cooperative agreement with cal trans and the state law. why however, as a state agency the standard agreement don't include provisions of chapters of the municipal code such as ways reduction and solicitation and modification process that puc will require for this type of engineering service agreement. >> both project require establish cooperative agreement with cal-trans so that they can perform techical review and allow puc to fund cal-trans staff to review the study reports is that consider professional service agreement under chapter 21 of code. puc condition move forward with this agreement without approval to wave requirements we

prosecute pose this for lower al men competence foalson project from the requirement it is of the administrative and amended code. we are happy to take questions you modify. >> thank you. is the wifr or municipal requirements the waiver just limited to these 2 locations and these 2 projects only? >> yes. and the 2 agreements. >> any questions. >> go to public comment. members when wish to speak in person line up now. for those remote and have in the done so press star 3 to enter the line. we have a stajdz rowel you need

to be seated. thank you very much. >> please. >> this is a waiver they want a waiver. -- i want a waiver, too.

is it tomorrow. does anybody know? >> will it be funny. yes sounds you hear on al mainy the engines have this power drowns out hall hear. people who manufacture these cars have this in minds when they do it. what you are thinking i will go to the store and get wet wipes. oh. what it does the car come and it black. black. black. you know. so, i don't know.

you know. okay. thank you. >> thank you. no further speakers in the chamber. i don't have no one in the queue. >> thank you. seeing no more comment it is closed. >> code requirement waiver but i get it we have to do this. in order for us to irrelevant do the storm water improve ams and it is needed in the 2 areas. with that, i like to move this forward with recommendation. with this, call the roll. >> on that motion to forward this to the board with positive recommendation voice chair mandelman. >> aye. why member safai. >> aye >> chair chan. why aye. why we have throw aye i >> call 8 and 9 together? >> items 8 and 9 resolution

authorizing the airport commission to accept and extend the grant not to additional amounts up to 15% of the grand through september command >> roof upgrade project. on receipt by airport commission approximate grant off from aviation administration. 9 a resolution approving amendment 3 to the international terminal food and bever lose with taste on the fly. as the 10 not in the city acting by the airport commission for i removal of one restaurant facility from the lease resulting in a reduction in the total lease square footage of the premesis boy fre% while

maintaining the annual guarantee of within.1 million approval of this resolution. members had wish to comment cal 415-655-0001, access code: 2592 192 7055 ##. >> it we have a verbal presentation by cathfresfo. thank you. you are in person. good to see you. >> good morning chair chan and supervisors. i'm kathy with the san francisco interinitial airport. i am begin address the item separately with item 8. seeks consideration to except special extend an airport grants

up to 31 million dollars for the international term until roof upgrade thank you very much grants come from the competitive funding portion of the infrastructure law passed in 20 ton. the term until grants program makes grants available for airports to address aging term until infrastructure. sfo received 31 million dollars guarantee offer in february of 2023 to funds a portion of the international officer upgrade project. the inter~ national term enemy building was built in the year 2000 and the roof reached the end of useful life. we experienced significant like nothing the terminal during the storm this is winter. >> the upgrade project will replace the roof membrane and waterproofing system on the if sad remove kroergz on exterior steel beam and replace the facade access system.

and install sole are panels on the officer which will gent rit 2,000 megawatts annually. budget analyst reviewed and recommends approval and i would be happy to answer questions you might have. item 8 a resolution approving the acceptance and spending. a grant of 31 million dollars. the resolution alighthouse the airport to receive up to 15% more in funds 4.65 million dollars if awarded by the faa. this funding will be applied to a project which we detail in the report to replace the receive of the terminal beyond the useful life. detailed the project budget on

page 30. which is 90 million dollars and recommend approval. >> >> thank you. seeing no names on the roster. let's go to public comment. why thank you. members when wish to speak on the items in person lineup and for those remotely press star 3. if you start out you go admit street. where else to be you star out at spo it is open 2 hers you stay there and you know.

one or 2 nights 9 months i was there. [inaudible] grant sfo i have good feels i think it should be a good item. when i'm asking thank you is a smart city. sudden front got an e lite population. everybody you can ford if you have a phd and master and professional. you are -- top, cream delacream, right. >> people you think that, great people amazing. [inaudible]. they have a thing about them this is rue and right and -- good. you know. you are here and 3 years homeless guy berkley graduate you are living on the street in i dumpster.

and you are looking at this and wondering, why? you know. just why. [laughter] it is funny. i'm the only person come mrining this is blows your -- you know when i money? and it is crazy. it is irrelevant wild. ethiopia i was there in 2013 last 2 weeks i think when i was there. it is beautiful. beautiful. like gold streets. and i was there and -- [whistling]. thank you for your comments. >> we have in spoeshgs in the queue. why thank you. and seeing no more public comment. public ment is closed. just i wanted to say you know it is wild that it is sad it see

the approximaterousing the footprint. sfo like during my travel i think it has been well and thank you for your team and everyone's hard w at sfo. i look forward it bounce back to prepandemic level this is summer we needs it. and congratulates extension it asia and jeopardy an it is great work. hopefully we see more coming back you know like occupying more spaces from our local ventz and condition transactors. thank you and so thank you and with that i want to make the motion to move 2 items to full board with recommendation. and with that mr. clerk call the roll. >> on the motion to forward these resolutions to the full

board with positive recommendation vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> member safai. >> aye >> chair chan. >> aye. >> thank you and the motion passes. mr. clerk call 10, 11, 12, 13 together. >> yes. steffen-13 are resolutions aproving the following programs for fiscal 23 to 24. and authorizing the mayor on behalf of the city to apply for, accept and extend the city's fitsical year 23-24 appropriate program entitlements from the u.s. d. housing and urban development. 10 is husbanding town for persons with aids or upon [inaudible] program. in the amount of 7 publicity 4 million and extend program and reprogram funds in the amount of 2.7 million. for a combined total of 10.1 million for july first of 23

through june 30 of 26. item 11 the emergency solution grant program in the amount of 1.6 million for period starting july first of 2023. item 12, community development block grant program in the amount offen. 8 million and to extend estimated income 6.2 million a total of 25 million. for a period july first of 23 through the date when funds are extended. item then the home investment partnership program the amount of 5.2 million and program income for 2 million total of 7.2 million. for the term of july first of 23 through june 30 of 28. members joining and wish to comment call 415-655-0001. access code: 2592 192 7055 #

employs thank you. before we star to go to mr. riafternoon director of community development. i want to flag it is unusual to see resolution that is combining apply for and accept and extend grant. together in one this is i do see a resolution to apply. when you receive the grant you and back. to see all 3 actions or seat 2 actions apply and accept and extend together in one resolution i have not seen this. but the programs are familiar to myself and my team.

it is things i think we always have done i do understand this. this is the routine when we need to do. let's not fall behind and not come become for retroactivity. it is my assumption that's why we are dog that. miit not set an example for everyone especially those who apply for new guarantee i would like everyone to go through the process. with this said, thank you. the floor is yours. thank you. just to respond. yes. in this case, may 15th is the dead line for our application. and the difference system that this is a formula grant. the amounts are predetermined and come out in march we know what we will get. not a competitive grant >> good to know >> i will go through them quickly. know each year we come with an

apply, accept and extend resolution for 4 hud funded programs. first is our housing opportunity for person with aids. this year the allocation is 7.4 million. a bit more than last year which was 7.0 million we are rolling all from last year provides funding for a variety of housing programs. transificational approximate permanent housing programs for people living with aids and subsidizes long-term rental begin from our office. we provide a small aim to san mateo county buzz they are part of our municipal area. we give those monies down to san mateo. the seconded part is our emergency solution grant program. those monies go through our department and administered through department of homelessness and supportive

housing for raert of guarantees that support our primarily emergency shelter programs. you see listed on the expenditure schedule. with this, we did not do a new procure am for the grants. again it was a slight increase from left year this year is within.6 left year 1.59. basically the same we roll over all those grants the community development block grant program this is one in which we have received every year. this year receiving 18.8 million left year was 18.2 million. what we do is we increase the amount this we have for youor capital program and housing programs. again, those dollars are spent boy our department with a mall

to economic and workforce development for economic development customer dover work. as well as their workforce development team they get within.sick million out of the pot. our dollars, primarily now focused on a small are number of large are grants to organizations that both have the capacity to administer the compliance with federal dollars required and also are in one of our primary 6 neighborhood revitalization strategy yours bay vow, viz valley. south of market, china town, tenderloin and the mission. because of the way that hud places restrictions on social service dollars the more we put in the 6 neighborhoods, the we can exceed the 15% cap we use for public services. gwen, all of those grants are remember rolled over from last year in a middle of multiyear

procure am the last part is home program and those dollars used for new construction. this was the one program we got a slight decrease. we have about 5.26 million this year. last year got 5.5 million. a bit less and those will be using for our new construction projects. so that's the -- short version whf we have if are our apply, accept and extend and able to answer questions you might have. why thank you. you so much and good to know than i are not competitive. with this. go to public comment. thank you. members had wish to speak on these items and joining person line up