. >> biodiverse city often argued to be important for the world's human populations because all of theinal plants and uses that we can put to it and fiber that it gives us and food that it gives us. while these are vital and important and worth literally hundreds of billions

policy 4.2, for the benefit of members of the public, takes the biodiverse city policy goals and basically talks about non-city lands or -- whether it's another government agency or a private property. and it says should, but should is a fairly strong term in terms of coming from our general plan. so, the city should ensure that a comprehensive inventory of all natural areas owned by city agencies other than rec and park and by private land holders is developed in order to preserve the city's biodiversity and natural areas more holistickly. so, to do a comprehensive inventory of all natural areas including those owned by private land owners, that has caused quit a bit of anxiety in terms of people not understanding what that means. ~ quite a bit frankly, it's very vague and broad so i'm not sure i fully, even know what that means. and then a few paragraphs down, it talks about the city, for properties that are not in the jurisdiction of the rec and park department, so including private property, the consideration should be given to a joint management -- to joint management through a conser

. >> biodiverse city often argued to be important for the world's human populations because all of the medicinal plants and uses that we can put to it and fiber that it gives us and food that it gives us. while these are vital and important and worth literally hundreds of billions of dollars, the part that we also have to be able to communicate is the more spiritual sense of how important it is that we get to live side by side with all of these forms that have three billion years of history behind them and how tragic it would be not commercially and not in a utilitarian way but an emotio l emotional, psychological, spiritual way if we watch them one by one disappear. >> this is sort of a merger between art and science and advocacy in a funny way getting people to wake unand realize what is going on -- wake up and realize what is going on. so it is a memborial trying to get us to interpret history and look to the past. they have always been about lacking at the past so we proceed forward and maybe don't commit the same mistakes. >> good morning and welcome to the san francisco transport

wanted to thank the planning staff and other city leaders for spending so many years on this element. i think that updating the element to include biodiversity as a goal and other issues are really critical. i wanted to raise a concern about objective 2 policy 2.1 and ask john ram, our planning director to explain. it seems a reading this we're expanding the definition of high needs areas that would be prioritized for open space and it's expanding it with additional criteria that allows more middle income neighborhoods to be considered and it seems to be not prioritizing in an equitable way the lowest income communities like the committee for better parks in chinatown or in lower income neighborhoods. and i'd just like to ask if [speaker not understood] or john ram could explain the rationale for the change with objective 2, policy 2.1. >> mr. ram? >> thank you, supervisors. john ram with the planning department. i think to clarify, supervisor mar, the median, the household income criteria has not changed. what has -- there has been other criteria added to identify the high needs areas such as areas of population growth and density and senio