supervisor peskin?pervisor peskin: [indiscern ible] if it's three or 130, that's way too much money. we should knock those fees down. we're knocking down fees over everything else. >> supervisor preston: thank you ms. gibson for clarifying on the fee. i do have some clarifying questions. that was one of them. thank you for answering that. this is $30,000 in planning department fees as supervisor peskin is pointing out set by the department. can you give me a little more explanation on the number? you showed the very dramatic chart of all the districts, hundreds of these sites. i'm imagining if the public is as confused as this supervisor to the distance between mr. drury's explanation of two or three sites here and your statement around 182 in my district alone, my question on that, i'm looking for a deeper dive on that slide where -- can you clarify is that 182 sites on the cortese list all of which got common sense exemptions and which fit into, maybe there's a breakdown -- fit into things that don't

supervisor peskin, should i make a motion. >> supervisor peskin: i will go ahead. let me just one last thought just so we can hopefully be moving forward. when we go through the long list of issues, i know there's a number that i'm sure you can in a few minutes you know, off line and there are others where i feel pretty confident where we'll be able to get there. but i do just want to end where i started in this hearing because i don't know what the pass through is and i just want to elevate on this issue of public access and i will say that the briefing last week, what's helpful, but not on this issue because i was raising basically the answer to why we were going to a model of mostly fully privateized parklets instead of public access parklets was sort of that was the directive from the mayor and that's what the small business community wants. and i just want to say for speaking just for myself and no other supervisors, that's not enough. like if there's a case to be made and i'm not saying it needs to be made. if there's a case to be made for moving the model al

. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, mr. president. i'd like to sever item number 40. >> president walton: thank you. supervisor chan. >> supervisor chan: mr. president, i would like to sever item number 35, please. >> president walton: thank you. supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, president walton. i'd like to sever item number 37. >> president walton: thank you, supervisor mandelman. seeing no one else on the roster. madam clerk, would you please call the roll for the remaining items. >> clerk: yes. on items 34, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42, and 43, [roll call] there are 11 ayes. >> president walton: thank you. and without objection, these resolutions are adopted unanimously. madam clerk, please call item number 35. >> clerk: item 35 resolution to urge the government in the department of housing and community development to immediately remove language barriers and affirmatively and immediately conduct outreach to under served populations and those under represented in present applications and to redesign futur

peskin. that will require a second. i don't see or hear anyone. >> supervisor chan: second. >> president walton: seconded by supervisor chan. there's a motion to continue for clarity, is it continue both items? >> supervisor peskin: no, only item 11. >> president walton: motion to continue item 11 made by supervisor peskin. seconded by supervisor chan. madam clerk, can we have a roll call vote? >> clerk: mr. president there are members of the the board on the roster. >> president walton: i don't see anybody. my apologies. i only see supervisor peskin's name. >> clerk: all right as the president said on the motion to continue item 11 to may 11th. [roll call vote] there are 3 ayes and 8 nos with supervisors melgar, preston, ronen, stefani, walton, haney and mar in dissent. >> president walton: thank you motion fails. supervisor peskin do you wish to speak on any other items? >> supervisor peskin: no sir. >> president walton: please call the roll for items 9-11. >> clerk: items 9-11. [roll call

i believe it's supervisor peskin who referredto these as well . as far as the threshold for permanence, the $99,000 for the trigger mandated upgrade. we recently had a through line backup and the ensuing damage required us to do a renovation and i saw just howquickly these costs can rise . we're also asking at the deadline be realigned to july 2023 for any building that were sold after 2017. so i want to thank the land use committee for taking this important issue into account and for listeningto our point of view. thank you . >> chair melgar:next speaker please . >> good afternoonto the land use committee and all those on this call . my name is jean novak and i'm an owner of an apartment building in san francisco and i appreciate it ifthe city would extend the deadline to upgrade the fire alarm system . i've been working hard with my renters to address all the covid rules and regulations and as a result have had to postpone various projects to ensure the safety and protection of my renters as well as to minimally disrupt their personal lives due

supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, colleagues. i'll try to be as brief as i can. just by way of background, i was an early supporter of then-supervisor maxwell's efforts to acquire esprit park, which the board passed exactly 20 years ago this month, may 5 of 2001, and of course, i support the current effort to renovation esprit park a generation later. colleagues, i also want to remind us that earlier this year, on january 26, to be precise, this board unanimously passed a policy resolution stating our policy that all community benefit districts, our one business improvement district and park district disclosed, as legally required, all business donations in excess of $100, and further, these not accept any anonymous contribution. this resolution was subsequently transmitted to the office of economic and workforce development that oversees all of the c.b.d.s and the one b.i.d. and is the agency that presents those annual reports to the government audit and oversight committee for review and ultimately for board of supervisors' approval. the resolution, which was a

>> supervisor peskin: sure. thank you chair melgar for scheduling this and supervisor preston for your collaboration, long before we were colleagues on the land use committee, this piece of legislation before us clarifies a key point in legislation that we passed earlier this year. that legislation created chapter 37-c of the administrative code that set forth some of the most significant and strongest protections for small businesses in the state during covid, which have since been emulated by other municipalities across the state. in one of the most significant parts of the legislation was to establish the right for a unilateral lease termination for the tenant for tier 1 tenants covered by the legislation, those who had under 10 employees and the amendments before us would clarify that such a termination would have the effect of relieving the small business of the obligation to continue paying rent under the remaining term of their lease if they chose to terminate it. while i think that was the -- that's what

supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair melgar. and, let me just start out with a respectful tone to the sponsor, mayor breed and the cosponsor, our colleague, supervisor haney, but really to underscore, i think fundamentally, this is a solution looking for a problem. and, if you look at the data that the planning department gave us and i'll drill down into that, i believe it proves that, if you look at a 5-year period of the total universe of the projects that were subject to analysis under the california environmental quality act, over 20,000, there were less than one hundred in that five-year period that were appealed through the board of supervisors. and, by the way, that is not a function of local law, that's a function of state law. the state legislature actually wanted, elected officials who are fundamentally accountable to the electorate to be the backstop in adjudicating these matters. with that said, less than a half percent of the total projects are being appealed to this board and as we all know as members of this board

supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: i wanted to ask a generalmanager ginsberg ,if he's available . >> president walton: madam clerk, do wehave general manager ginsberg available or a representative ? >> for item 3, we have available marissa talley and joel goldberg, charlotte wu and cj whitley, emily cohen and i'm going down the list for rec and park. i don't seesomeone for rec and park . >>. >> supervisor peskin: that works mister president. >> president walton: i don't see him. . >> we also have lamont bishop. >> that does not work. >> if not, mister president we could skip over this matter while we try to locate them. >> i thinkthat would be appropriate if that works for you . >> i just would like to have a conversation with rex and park based on the actions of the alliance that i consider to be wholly-owned subsidiary area of the recreation and parks department as to the offensive letter that they sent to our colleague supervisor jan . i'd like to have that public discussion before we vote on thisitem . >> president walton: we can come back to this item. i wouldhope that dire

supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair melgar. and, let me just start out with a respectful tone to the sponsor, mayor breed and the cosponsor, our colleague, supervisor haney, but really to underscore, i think fundamentally, this is a solution looking for a problem. and, if you look at the data that the planning department gave us and i'll drill down into that, i believe it proves that, if you look at a 5-year period of the total universe of the projects that were subject to analysis under the california environmental quality act, over 20,000, there were less than one hundred in that five-year period that were appealed through the board of supervisors. and, by the way, that is not a function of local law, that's a function of state law. the state legislature actually wanted, elected officials who are fundamentally accountable to the electorate to be the backstop in adjudicating these matters. with that said, less than a half percent of the total projects are being appealed to this board and as we all know as members of this board

supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: [indiscern ible] if it's three or 130, that's way too much money. we should knock those fees down. we're knocking down fees over everything else. >> supervisor preston: thank you ms. gibson for clarifying on the fee. i do have some clarifying questions. that was one of them. thank you for answering that. this is $30,000 in planning department fees as supervisor peskin is pointing out set by the department. can you give me a little more explanation on the number? you showed the very dramatic chart of all the districts, hundreds of these sites. i'm imagining if the public is as confused as this supervisor to the distance between mr. drury's explanation of two or three sites here and your statement around 182 in my district alone, my question on that, i'm looking for a deeper dive on that slide where -- can you clarify is that 182 sites on the cortese list all of which got common sense exemptions and which fit into, maybe there's a breakdown -- fit into things that

thank you, chair peskin. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor chan. before we open it up to public comment, i think your amendments are responsive to what we saw on the package to the small business commission which obviously is your prerogative as supervisor to take those suggestions or not. i'm glad you guys have had a collective collaboration. i would like to be added as a cosponsor. i don't see any names on the roster, so why don't we go to public comment. >> clerk: there are no callers in cue queue. >> chairman: okay. public comment is closed and supervisor chan, would you like to make a motion to amend? are you on the chat? >> supervisor mandelman: i am, but you're not seeing it, are you? >> i have john c. we still have a problem houston. you've got like three hours into this computer and we've tested it this morning and it's still not working. but this will be the sub theme of the pandemic for this chairperson. supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, chair peskin. and i want to thank su

supervisor peskin? >> thank you. colleagues, last but not least, i have a number of items this afternoon and i will speak to some of them. first i am introducing a resolution addressing a perennial and long-standing issue for the city, the region, and the state. it is a complement -- complex environmental policy matter which i hold dear and have a long history with. namely the allocation of water from the river watershed and its major tributaries to meet the needs of not only san francisco residents, but residents along the peninsula all the way down to southern alameda county, as well as the agricultural sector in the central valley, and critically, and this is the sector that has been perennially ignored, our environment, which has suffered immensely from diminished flows resulting in catastrophic declines of not crashing of the population of key species like the chinook salmon. those of you who were on the board back in 2018, which is most of us, will recall when the state water resources board last updated the qu

supervisor peskin? >> thank you. colleagues, last but not least, i have a number of items this afternoon and i will speak to some of them. first i am introducing a resolution addressing a perennial and long-standing issue for the city, the region, and the state. it is a complement -- complex environmental policy matter which i hold dear and have a long history with. namely the allocation of water from the river watershed and its major tributaries to meet the needs of not only san francisco residents, but residents along the peninsula all the way down to southern alameda county, as well as the agricultural sector in the central valley, and critically, and this is the sector that has been perennially ignored, our environment, which has suffered immensely from diminished flows resulting in catastrophic declines of not crashing of the population of key species like the chinook salmon. those of you who were on the board back in 2018, which is most of us, will recall when the state water resources board last updated the qu

supervisor peskin. >> commissioner peskin: thank you,. >> supervisor mar:.just a suggestion, which insofar as july 12th is little ways away. and there's a lot of uncertainty between now and then, just food for thought. i'm happy to vote for july 12th. but it may be more expedient to continue it to the call of the chair. and you can schedule it earlier or later. but just a suggestion. >> supervisor melgar: i will entertain either motion, supervisor peskin. the supervisor who sponsored it specifically requested the date. i think your suggestion is better. >> commissioner peskin: well, given those words, i will make said motion to continue the item to the call of the chair. >> supervisor melgar: thank you, supervisor. >> clerk: to continue the item to the call of the chair. moved by supervisor peskin. supervisor peskin. >> commissioner peskin:ize. >> clerk: supervisor preston. >> commissioner preston: aye. >> clerk: supervisor melgar. >> supervisor melgar: aye. >> clerk: you have three ayes. >> supervisor melgar: thank you, madam clerk. will you please call ite

, supervisor peskin .[roll call vote] you have 30 aye's. >> chair melgar: thank you. >> supervisor peskin: i like to make a motion to continue this itemone as amended >> chair melgar: do we have to vote on that motion ? i didn't hear you madam clerk. >> erica major: youare good madam chair . on the motion as stated by supervisor peskinto continue the item as amended, supervisor peskin .[roll call vote] you have 3 aye's. >> chair melgar: the motion passes. madam clerk, would youplease call item number two . >> erica major: item 2 is a move to amend the housing code and affirm appropriatefinding. members of the public whowish to provide public comment on item number two should call th item on the screen . extra 18 . the meeting id is 187 724 4053 . then press pound, pound. if you have not done so, please dial star 3 to lineup to speak for item number two. lookclosely for the seven system prop .when we get to public comment list and listen for the system to indicate tha you have been on muted and you maybe ge

supervisor peskin, should i make a motion. >> supervisor peskin: i will go ahead. let me just one last thought just so we can hopefully be moving forward. when we go through the long list of issues, i know there's a number that i'm sure you can in a few minutes you know, off line and there are others where i feel pretty confident where we'll be able to get there. but i do just want to end where i started in this hearing because i don't know what the pass through is and i just want to elevate on this issue of public access and i will say that the briefing last week, what's helpful, but not on this issue because i was raising basically the answer to why we were going to a model of mostly fully privateized parklets instead of public access parklets was sort of that was the directive from the mayor and that's what the small business community wants. and i just want to say for speaking just for myself and no other supervisors, that's not enough. like if there's a case to be made and i'm not saying it needs to be made. if there's a case to be made for moving the model al

i know chair peskin, you're well aware of that.ed her on the port and i really appreciate your time this morning. so thank you very much. >> chairman: thank you, commissioner walker. next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors. my name is herman badget, i would just like to applaud ms. brandon on her leadership over the past two decades on the port and for all her efforts during covid and assisting a number of the smaller local business enterprises in the southeast sector. without her leadership, a lot more of the smaller businesses would have suffered and i just wanted to have the opportunity to applaud her and i look forward to her continued leadership as the president of the port. >> chairman: thank you, next speaker. >> hello, i work with small and micro-lbes in district 10 and i'm calling to show my support for the reappointment of commissioner brandon. i think she's done so much for the waterfront especially in the southeast and has done to represent the communities especially where a lot of the development is happenin

supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair melgar. and, let me just start out with a respectful tone to the sponsor, mayor breed and the cosponsor, our colleague, supervisor haney, but really to underscore, i think fundamentally, this is a solution looking for a problem. and, if you look at the data that the planning department gave us and i'll drill down into that, i believe it proves that, if you look at a 5-year period of the total universe of the projects that were subject to analysis under the california environmental quality act, over 20,000, there were less than one hundred in that five-year period that were appealed through the board of supervisors. and, by the way, that is not a function of local law, that's a function of state law. the state legislature actually wanted, elected officials who are fundamentally accountable to the electorate to be the backstop in adjudicating these matters. with that said, less than a half percent of the total projects are being appealed to this board and as we all know as members of this board

>> aye. >> clerk: chair peskin? >> chairman: aye. >> clerk: the motion to amend is adopted without objection. >> chairman: i would like to send the motion at amended with recommendation to the full board of supervisors. on that motion, a roll call, please. >> clerk: yes, on that motion, supervisor mandelman? >> aye. >> clerk: supervisor chan? >> aye. >> clerk: chair peskin? >> chairman: aye. >> clerk: the motion is adopted without objection. >> chairman: thank you, mr. clerk. congratulations, julia, and colleagues, we are adjourned. >> thank you. >> shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses, and challenges residents to do their shopping within the 49 square miles of san francisco. by supporting local services in our neighborhood, we help san francisco remain unique, successful, and vibrant. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> i am the owner of this restaurant. we have been here in north beach over 100 years. [speaking foreign language] [♪♪♪] [speaking foreign language] [♪♪♪] [speaking foreign langu

i just have to say supervisor peskin, i love that idea. i hear what you are saying chief but i never thought about it in that way but i know in the san bruno it took us a long time to get cantonese speaking officers walking that beat and it might be legal. great idea supervisor peskin and never thought about that before. i wanted to congratulate and you the department on some really progress and real meaty, meaningful progress so congratulations. i know it's been a lot of hard work. i texted you, i think it was last week, because i just had an incredibly wonderful experience with one of nur officers and lieutenant molina and lieutenant cruger before molina who just retired. they work in the crisis intervention team and they head up that team and i know that they played a very, very important role of training the officers and crisis intervention which is amazing how many have been trained and i know you are going to get the whole force trained and that's so important but their so physical indication and crisis intervention and deescalation,

. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, mr. president. i'd like to sever item number 40. >> president walton: thank you. supervisor chan. >> supervisor chan: mr. president, i would like to sever item number 35, please. >> president walton: thank you. supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, president walton. i'd like to sever item number 37. >> president walton: thank you, supervisor mandelman. seeing no one else on the roster. madam clerk, would you please call the roll for the remaining items. >> clerk: yes. on items 34, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42, and 43, [roll call] there are 11 ayes. >> president walton: thank you. and without objection, these resolutions are adopted unanimously. madam clerk, please call item number 35. >> clerk: item 35 resolution to urge the government in the department of housing and community development to immediately remove language barriers and affirmatively and immediately conduct outreach to under served populations and those under represented in present applications and to redesign futur

supervisor peskin. >> commissioner peskin: thank you,. >> supervisor mar:. just a suggestion, which insofar as july 12th is little ways away. and there's a lot of uncertainty between now and then, just food for thought. i'm happy to vote for july 12th. but it may be more expedient to continue it to the call of the chair. and you can schedule it earlier or later. but just a suggestion. >> supervisor melgar: i will entertain either motion, supervisor peskin. the supervisor who sponsored it specifically requested the date. i think your suggestion is better. >> commissioner peskin: well, given those words, i will make said motion to continue the item to the call of the chair. >> supervisor melgar: thank you, supervisor. >> clerk: to continue the item to the call of the chair. moved by supervisor peskin. supervisor peskin. >> commissioner peskin:ize. >> clerk: supervisor preston. >> commissioner preston: aye. >> clerk: supervisor melgar. >> supervisor melgar: aye. >> clerk: you have three ayes. >> supervisor melgar: thank you, madam clerk. will you please call it

supervisor peskin. >> submit. >> clerk: thank

peskin. that will require a second. i don't see or hear anyone. >> supervisor chan: second. >> president walton: seconded by supervisor chan. there's a motion to continue for clarity, is it continue both items? >> supervisor peskin: no, only item 11. >> president walton: motion to continue item 11 made by supervisor peskin. seconded by supervisor chan. madam clerk, can we have a roll call vote? >> clerk: mr. president there are members of the the board on the roster. >> president walton: i don't see anybody. my apologies. i only see supervisor peskin's name. >> clerk: all right as the president said on the motion to continue item 11 to may 11th. [roll call vote] there are 3 ayes and 8 nos with supervisors melgar, preston, ronen, stefani, walton, haney and mar in dissent. >> president walton: thank you motion fails. supervisor peskin do you wish to speak on any other items? >> supervisor peskin: no sir. >> president walton: please call the roll for items 9-11. >> clerk: items 9-11. [roll call

supervisor peskin. >> thank you, president and colleagues. i want to thank the clerk who, as usual, has sent out e-mails requesting information relative to retroactive approvals and this may have been discussed in the budget and finance committee, but this is i believe the only retroactive approval of the last e-mail that i saw. i admit, i'm a little bit behind on my e-mails. yesterday the clerk sent us an e-mail saying there was no justification provided for the retroactivity. >> chair: thank you, supervisor peskin. madam clerk, do we have someone here? >> clerk: yes, we have two individuals. >> chair: do we know if they have made it? >> clerk: we're checking. >> we did provide an e-mail to the board earlier today. with respect to this item, the retroactivity is intended only by the date which we have on the grant agreement which was april 1. we do not expect to enter into these grant agreements until after the board made this approval and we will enter into the agreement and there will be no spending that occurs here. >> chair: supervisor p

supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair haney, and thank you too for that presentation. and you're the little itty-bitty department that does. i mean, obviously, you know, small department, a lot of technical assistance, business assistance center, but i wanted to -- insofar as this is the budget and appropriations committee and this is in advance of the submission of the budget -- and i want to call out the -- just the phenomenal success of the legacy business program, both on the -- well, actually, in many ways on the psychological side, on just the pride of having a legacy business. last saturday i had the pleasure of going to the art imports on the occasion of their 75th anniversary under their third ownership in the same location. and they're just so proud of the fact that, i mean, obviously, they are a legacy business, lower case "l," lower case "b," but hats off to my former colleague for forwarding this notion. and also on the monetary side, which is that it wasn't just a psych

>> aye. >> clerk: chair peskin? >> chairman: aye. >> clerk: the motion to amend is adopted without objection. >> chairman: i would like to send the motion at amended with recommendation to the full board of supervisors. on that motion, a roll call, please. >> clerk: yes, on that motion, supervisor mandelman? >> aye. >> clerk: supervisor chan? >> aye. >> clerk: chair peskin? >> chairman: aye. >> clerk: the motion is adopted without objection. >> chairman: thank you, mr. clerk. congratulations, julia, and colleagues, we are adjourned. >> thank you. >> good evening this is the meeting of the san francisco commission on the environment and the time is 5:07 p.m. cell phone pagers are still prohibited. please turn devices off. due to the health emergency, the commission on the environment meeting room is closed. however, commissioners and department staff will participate remotely. this precaution is taken pursuant to the state wide stay at home order and all orders, decorations and

supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair haney, and thank you too for that presentation. and you're the little itty-bitty department that does. i mean, obviously, you know, small department, a lot of technical assistance, business assistance center, but i wanted to -- insofar as this is the budget and appropriations committee and this is in advance of the submission of the budget -- and i want to call out the -- just the phenomenal success of the legacy business program, both on the -- well, actually, in many ways on the psychological side, on just the pride of having a legacy business. last saturday i had the pleasure of going to the art imports on the occasion of their 75th anniversary under their third ownership in the same location. and they're just so proud of the fact that, i mean, obviously, they are a legacy business, lower case "l," lower case "b," but hats off to my former colleague for forwarding this notion. and also on the monetary side, which is that it wasn't just a psych

vice chair peskin. >> supervisor peskin: thank you chair mandelman. many of the questions i was going to ask were asked by commissioner haney. i'm really happy that we got rid of the committee system on this body and we're also actually meeting as one. in the old day, we had two committees and we would have never had this conversation as a full body. i'm kind of pleased with myself about that. but before going down that rabbit hole, i want to say, at the beginning, ms. kerrshbow, you identified two constraints, financial constraints and human resource constraints and we've been back and forth over the last number of questions that have been asked and answered. i think you still have financial constraints. i understand you have a bunch of one-time money and you don't want to go down the road of creating ongoing obligations with that one-time money. but i think you need to articulate what your financial constraints are and how you want this appropriative body and our other incarnation as the board of supervisors. i said, hey, here is all this newfound m

supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: i would be happy to make that motion. there are really two sets of recommendations that the planning commission recommended to this committee and this board of supervisors. one is the first that which is really kind of the larger public policy. the second are a series of amendments that i think this legislation could benefit from. unfortunately, they are mostly deemed to be substantive that would require additional time. so what i would like to do is duplicate the file and i'd like to do so now and after we get back from the memorial day quick recess, make those amendments relative to the time limitation from three to four years which is substantive relative to having the use revert to it's pre-liquor store use and a couple of other amendments that i will have that be follow-up legislation so that we can at least get this development going and keep this legacy business on its feet. i just wanted to save that for the record. i'd like to duplicate the file and, madam chair, i'll come to you some time in june and still have

vice chair peskin. >> supervisor peskin: thank you chair mandelman. many of the questions i was going to ask were asked by commissioner haney. i'm really happy that we got rid of the committee system on this body and we're also actually meeting as one. in the old day, we had two committees and we would have never had this conversation as a full body. i'm kind of pleased with myself about that. but before going down that rabbit hole, i want to say, at the beginning, ms. kerrshbow, you identified two constraints, financial constraints and human resource constraints and we've been back and forth over the last number of questions that have been asked and answered. i think you still have financial constraints. i understand you have a bunch of one-time money and you don't want to go down the road of creating ongoing obligations with that one-time money. but i think you need to articulate what your financial constraints are and how you want this appropriative body and our other incarnation as the board of supervisors. i said, hey, here is all this newfound m

supervisor mandelman and peskin and ronen had a hearing back in march. they talked about how much commercial retail -- excuse me commercial rent backed up for many people, many businesses. what we are trying to find out in this hearing is what we can do as government, how much available grants are there from all government sources municipal, state and federal to help businesses with gross receipts under $15 million with unpaid rent. that was generally as a result of our health orders. i know there are conversations about dealing with the rent, pandemic rent. very similar to the conversations we have had at the budget committee, i can tell you with confidence how much we put aside to help tenants with back rent. commercial retail tenants. i can't say that with certainty. the bla report that retail alone predicted between 165 to over $300 million in back rent from april of last year through the end of this year. this is a crisis because the commercial eviction moratorium might expire june 30th. we need a handle on how much we have in grants to provide to h

>> aye. >> clerk: chair peskin? >> chairman: aye. >> clerk: the motion to amend is adopted without objection. >> chairman: i would like to send the motion at amended with recommendation to the full board of supervisors. on that motion, a roll call, please. >> clerk: yes, on that motion, supervisor mandelman? >> aye. >> clerk: supervisor chan? >> aye. >> clerk: chair peskin? >> chairman: aye. >> clerk: the motion is adopted without objection. >> chairman: thank you, mr. clerk. congratulations, julia, and colleagues, we are adjourned. >> thank you. >> san francisco parks, golden gate park transforms into one of the greatest music festivals of all time, let's journey, inside, outside land. ♪♪ >> to this, our 6th year doing the outside lands and our relationship with san francisco, rec and park. and we work very closely with them in the planning and working very closely with the neighborhood organizations and with the city supervisors and with the city organizations and with the local police department, and i think that