then supervisor norman yee or he was probably president yee at the time, further pushed the compliance check list back to december 1, 2020 and mayor breed pushed those deadlines back to june 30, 2022. and then i authored the first of two extensions earlier in the year taking the deadline to june 30 of this year, and then put in another one which pushed back to december 31 this year, but this can only go on so long. when my staff brought the last extension to building commission may 15, the members made clear they were not inclined to approve any further extensions to the program deadlines. so, these 6,000 businesses that have not complied or yet complied present a conundrum and choice for our city government. we could double down on enforcement of the abe program as originally passed and are i don't think that is a good idea. i think it presents at least three problems i can think of. first, it would require allocating significant scarce dbi and other city resources to chasing down citing and enforcing against these businesses and property owners and some might think in a moment of hou

submission for the checklist to extend that deadline to january one 2019 and all the other deadline and norman yee pushed this in 2020 and with the deadlines and mayor london breed pushed that back to 2022 i offered the extension in the first checklist to june throwing it out there and second back to the 31st, 2024 folks this can only go on for so long. you all support some of have noted i believe my staff brought the last extension to the bic on may 15th of this and the number is familiar with you're not inclined to recommend any he further extensions for the per enforcement deadlines to move forward 6 thousand businesses have not complied present a choice for the disfigure one option to double down on enforcement of ab program under the originally task and that is an option don't believe the right option the problems are 3 fold one, will require allocating dbi and other cities resources to program on enforcing the a b e and charles kremenak them and enforcing against businesses and property owners any time when the city budget is through depression the city will find the resources for the new en

then supervisor norman yee or he was probably president yee at the time, further pushed the compliance check list back to december 1, 2020 and mayor breed pushed those deadlines back to june 30, 2022. and then i authored the first of two extensions earlier in the year taking the deadline to june 30 of this year, and then put in another one which pushed back to december 31 this year, but this can only go on so long. when my staff brought the last extension to building commission may 15, the members made clear they were not inclined to approve any further extensions to the program deadlines. so, these 6,000 businesses that have not complied or yet complied present a conundrum and choice for our city government. we could double down on enforcement of the abe program as originally passed and are i don't think that is a good idea. i think it presents at least three problems i can think of. first, it would require allocating significant scarce dbi and other city resources to chasing down citing and enforcing against these businesses and property owners and some might think in a moment of hou

as-my previous supervisor for district 7 former president norman yee and myself channeled considerable funding to sf safe for community safety issues. mostly cameras on commercial corridors. the process for getting data from those cameras once there was a break-in was onerous and all went through kira worthy but the cameras are still there. we invested in them and there was a very bureaucratic process to get them up, but now where does that information go and how do we get access to it, because we all over dist rict 7 have cameras paid for from public tax dollars for over the years. i have a couple more questions. >> hi, supervisor. >> hi. >> quickly on that, there is actually a point of contention with the people installing and having the cameras under their purview, and this whole incident. so, we have been working with our ced, community engagement division to kind of relook at that and we are looking to reengage, but we would become the new care takers that system and that's one of the points that we are trying to figure out, because that would be obviously us coming back to the bo