the original fmnd was appealed and heard by the board on september 17, 2017. prior to that, there was an appeal of the preliminary rmnd, and the plan -- and at the planning commission on june 15, 2017, and there was a prior appeal hearing at the board on the previously issued categorical exemption for 2060. at the september hearing, even with that review, [inaudible] to the integrity of the pipeline during the construction. by having the proper review and approval by various agencies. further, staff noted that countless other steeply sloped sites in the city are in proximity to pg&e pipeline, including about 20 with active planning applications. planning happens all the time in proximity to pipelines x there are ways to do so safely, despite the valid concerns about pg&e's safety record. the general comment during public comment was that an e.i.r. should be provided to provide people more information on the project and potential safety impacts. at this end of the hearing, supervisor ronen noted that her office had spent an inordinate amount of time on this peap

you spent 10 years on the board of governors. you really are an expert on the postal service and the board of governors. i would like to ask you about the process of selecting the postmaster general. in your 10 years on the board, you were involved in the hiring of two postmasters, one in 1998 and the other in 2001. is that correct? mr. fineman: yes. ms. maloney: during those selection processes, was it standard for the board to contract an outside firm to conduct the search? mr. fineman: yes, it was. ms. maloney: well, that makes sense. the board is small and needs to perform an executive search for one of our country's most important independent agencies. now, during our hearing on august 24, chairman duncan indicated that he put mr. dejoy's name into consideration. after russell reynolds associates had already provided a list of qualified candidates to the board for consideration, he went into detail. they had many people considered. they narrowed it down to 200. then to 50. then to 12. in either of your selection processes for

at the corrections or modifications from the board? >> i'll make a motion to approve the minutes, as presented. >> second. >> okay. i think we have an opportunity for public comment at this point. >> clerk: okay. the moderator will be opening up the phone lines. the slide presented gives information on the public comment call-in number, which is (408)418-9388, access code 1467291452. for all attendees, please be aware there's a 30-second lag time from our presentation to sfgov tv, at which point we will give 30 seconds for people to catch up. and our moderator will let us know when attend eres and public comment is open. >> thank you, secretary. if you could please -- at this time we have two callers on the phone lines. zero callers have specifically entered the public comment queue. a reminder to all callers on the line, please dial star 3 now. if you would like to join public comment for this agenda item. we will wait five more seconds. commission secretary, there are still no public callers in the queue at this time. >> clerk: thank

the original fmnd was appealed and heard by the board on september 17, 2017. prior to that, there was an appeal of the preliminary rmnd, and the plan -- and at the planning commission on june 15, 2017, and there was a prior appeal hearing at the board on the previously issued categorical exemption for 2060. at the september hearing, even with that review, [inaudible] to the integrity of the pipeline during the construction. by having the proper review and approval by various agencies. further, staff noted that countless other steeply sloped sites in the city are in proximity to pg&e pipeline, including about 20 with active planning applications. planning happens all the time in proximity to pipelines x there are ways to do so safely, despite the valid concerns about pg&e's safety record. the general comment during public comment was that an e.i.r. should be provided to provide people more information on the project and potential safety impacts. at this end of the hearing, supervisor ronen noted that her office had spent an inordinate amount of time on this peap

ever since the board of governors announced the selection of mr. dejoy as postmaster general, questions have been raised about the process for selecting him and possible conflicts of interest, given his many financial interests and postal service contractors. during our full committee hearing on august 24th, 2020, multiple committee members questioned mr. dejoy and board chairman dunkin about his selection process and whether it was influenced by the fact that both mr. dejoy and mr. dunkin are longtime mega donors for the republican party. when directly asked by congressman cooper whether mr. dejoy had ever paid back any of his executives for contributing to republican campaigns by providing bonuses or rewarding them, mr. dejoy responded in no uncertain terms, that's an outrageous claim, sir. and i resent it, end quote. yet less than two weeks later, a headline appeared in "the washington post" which stated, and i quote, louis dejoy's rise as gop fund raiser was powered by contributions from company workers who were later reimbursed, former employe

while the board w of governors might be tickled pink with mr. dejoy's performance, the macon people are not, perhaps they need to be reminded that their job is to serve the country, not any particular president, i look forward to hearing from her expert witnesses continuing the critical discussion in the committee's ongoing investigation. with that i recognize my friend distinguish ranking member for his opening remarks. >> thank you, mr. chairman, the mere notion that this hearing is a postal update is utter nonsense by the chairman's own admission moments ago and the issues that will be discussed, it shows the hearing for what it is, and absolute force, not a single one of the witnesses who are here are supposed to be having a postal update and not a single witness even worked for the usps currently. the fact is in relation to the postal service update because of better-than-expected revenue during the pandemic, because of packages, the postal service is reported that a has enough money to be solvent to at least august of next year, 11 months f

at the october board meeting. we have a crowded calender coming up. as noted on page 4. we have our large volume esg updates. we also have a complete set of our risk exposures for the plans so those are two large items that we'll be doing at the october board meeting and we do have an october 21, i.c. meeting as we indicated and it will be allen and anna and i will be leading a conversation with the board on asset allocation and average between 5% and 10% and we like to hear, i plan to do a presentation on science and technology and ovation at the october 21ic meeting and we would like science and tech to be fully vetted by the board and in advance and in your decision so earlier today, darlene began to poll the board on another ic meeting on either october 28th n november 18th, that will determine whether asset allocation is recommended to the board the night of the november or the december board meeting. and it will be a great second ic meeting and we'll have three presenters amongst our very top performers acros

had eight asks to the board. while the district made progress in some areas, others still need work, and some new concerns have arisen: one, we ask to keep distance learning for students who are thriving or have medical needs. the c.a.c. is excited to hear a limited hybrid option is being planned, but parents and students in priority groups that are thriving in virtual school or medically fragile should still have the option for virtual learning until it is safe or appropriate for them to return in person. two, conversely, we ask to create an in-person option for students who can't access distance learning. while we appreciate that our most impacted students will be prioritized to return to school, there are many other students receiving special education services who are struggling and would also like an option to return. how and when will the district be able to skoaccommodate thos students? further, the c.a.c. is concerned about the layoff of the first student bus drivers? how will transportation be provided if

i'm calling to demand the board of. supervisors protect the funds allocated to city workers and the black community. i'm here because black lives matter to me and they should to all of us. the mayor is threatening to use her executive power to defund frontline and essential workers to pay for police officer raises. the own way to protect the workers who truly create public safety is through new legislation that sources from the 37.9 million raises. don't make us fight for scraps. our city spends one billion each year on policing and what does it say when elected officials threaten to defund teachers like myself? >> i'm pausing your time. i'm pausing your time. thank you for your comments. operations, next caller, please. >> speaker: i'm alice and i'm a black woman in district six is i'm here to demand the board of supervisors prioritize funding for the black community over giving police even more money. the police budget is nearly a billion dollars. why are we wasting so much money on an institution that brutalizes your

the board of supervisors and the committee room are closed. this precaution is taken to local, state and orders and directives. the committee members will attend through video conference and participate in the meeting to the same extent as if physically present. public comment is available for each item on the agenda, on cable channel 26 and they are streaming the call-in number across the screen. provide public comments during the public comment period by calling 1-(415)-655-0001. once connected and prompted to the meeting i.d., today's meeting i.d. is 1467063442. and then press pound twice to be connected to the meeting. when connected you will hear the meeting discussions but your line is muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, dial 3 to be added to the speaker line. please wait until the system indicates that you have been unmuted and you may begin comments. best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your tv and your radio or streaming device. everyone should acco

we'll be joined from the city department presenting for the board this evening, scott sanchez, deputy zoning administrator with the planning department, joseph duffy, acting chief building inspector with building inspection, carla short, superintendent with san francisco public works and chris boch, with the bureau of urban forestry. the board requests you turn off or silence all phones so they will not disturb the proceedings. the appellants and permit holders are given seven minutes to present their case and three minutes for rebuttal and people affiliated must include seven or three-minute period. members not affiliated have up to three minutes each to address the board and no rebuttal. time may be limited to two minutes. if you have questions about a rehearing email boardofappea bof appeals. to enable public participation, sf gov is streaming live and we will receive it live. to watch it on tv, go to cable channel 78. it will be rebroadcast on fridays at 4:00. a link to the livestream is found on the website so public comment can be provided in two ways. you can join the zoom meet

or the motion in 17151 issued by the board. first of all, the motion required a management plan and the one submitted does not consider the street excavation details and special circumstances like an "l," near the site and tree roots located dangerously near the pipeline. second, the -- instead planning allowed the project sponsor to hire their own consultant to prepare the v.m.p. third, the motion required a site-specific emergency plan prepared to ensure adequate access to emergency response and the ability for a safe and timely evacuation. the r.s.m.d. emergency plan is patently dangerous. it does not follow the recommendations and not site-specific and does not take into account gas movement or access issues. it was stated by the project sponsor himself, rather than by a qualified emergency professional. now i'm going to introduce you a civil engineer and he'll speak to the technical issues. dave. >> yes. good afternoon, president yee and board members. thank you for granting a continuance to these proceedings to allow us to

, but we add the best members to board that push companies forward. >> ken, i hope you will oblige me a question or two about merck's effort to get a covid vaccine. it's certainly topical, giving the fact you were one of the ceos who signed the safety pledge the other day and the astrazeneca news we're trying to process over the last 24 hours or so. can you give me an update on where merck stands in its race to develop a vaccine, in terms of that phase one trial? >> let's saying we are advancing two candidates we haven't talked a lot about them publicly. we tent not to talk about the work that we're doing until we have meaningful clinical up results. but going back to the pledge we want people to know is the first thing we're focused on safety before we bring a vaccine to market. >> do you worry at all about the political pressures infiltra infiltrating, if you will, into the approval process of any vaccine candidate that's out there? >> well, i know there's a lot of public voices talking about when vaccines will be ready,

tht, president yee and members of the board. i am gloria smith and i am an attorney for the appellants. as you know from our submittals, this appeal is about making sure that the proposed project is safe from potential seismic and landslide impacts. on august 7, the project sponsor opposed this appeal by saying that there had been a site visit that showed no evidence of active slope instability. dr. larry carp of u.c.-berkley has expected the entire slope from mountain spring avenue down to claritin avenue and he found substantial slope instability in his september 9 report. if the project sponsor missed this, it is highly likely they were simply looking within the project footprint itself rater than the whole area from mountain spring avenue down to claritin. and there's no evidence that anyone from d.b.i.er to planning department has gone out and actually inspected this site either. in addition, the project sponsor has claimed, quote, the project will comply with the sfpa during the department of building inspections review and

the [inaudible]. as you know, this is my last board meeting. i want to thank you for your support for the extraordinary opportunity and the opportunity to serve you as an agency director during the last four years. my time has been rewarding, and this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that will benefit the community, neighborhoods, and san francisco for years to come. i see it as a critical and long-term economic success of the bay area and beyond. the transbay program has already provided the region with the salesforce transit center and the many benefits that it brings to communities, residents, and the region. the phase two will transform the way we travel within the state, and it can also be a cosmic engine bringing people back to work by providing so many jobs. [inaudible] and i'm happy, i'm confident that the phase two will be a success, as well. again, thank you very much. this concludes my reports. >> thank you, director. i was curious, any members of the board have questions on the director's report? >> no. this is elaine forbes, but

good afternoon, president yee, members of the board. joining me today are staff members from the planning department as well as the sfmta. the item before you is an appeal of an emergency project statutory exemption for the sfmta's slow streets phase one project. on april 21, 2020, the planning department determined that the project was statutorily exempt under the california environmental quality act, ceqa, guidelines section 152-69c, also referred to as an emergency statutory exemption, which applies to specific actions to prevent or mitigate an emergency. as described in detail in our appeal response submitted to the board on august 24, the project qualifies as an emergency project statutory exemption. there are two main topics that the appellant has raised that i will address now. topic one relates to the definition of an emergency and how slow streets phase one project is mitigating the emergency. the appellant is implying that the covid-19 public health emergency does not meet the public resources definition of an emergency which i

>> clerk: to protect the board members and the employees and the public, the board of supervisors legislative chamber and committee room are closed, and they will participate remotely. this precaution is taken pursuant to the local and state and federal orders, declarations and directives. the committee members will attend through video conference and participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were physically present. public comments will be available on each item on this agenda and both channel 26 and sfgovtv.org are streaming the number across the screen. each speaker is given two minutes to speak. the opportunity to speak during the public comment period are available by calling 1-(415)-655-0001, again, 1-(415)-655-0001. and meeting i.d., 146 892 6687. again, 146 892 6687. and then press pound twice. when connected you will hear the meeting discussion, but you will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, dial star, 3, to be added to the speaker line. and the best practice is to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn dow

joining me is the chair of the board of the trustees of the mexican museum and the vice chair of the board of trustees, secretary of the board of trustees and others we're available for any questions you may have and that concludes the presentation. thank you. >> mrfk >> madame secretary, do we have members of the public wishing to provide public comment. >> those members of the public wish to comment dial 1-408-418-9388 enter 146 642 8927, press the pound sign twice to be entered in the call and press star 3 to be pressed in the queue. if you're already listening by phone president star 3 if you'd like to provide a comment. we'll allow a few moments. >> there are no callers. >> no members of the public. >> commissioner: i'll close the public comment. let's start with commissioner scott. do you have questions or comments? >> thank you for your presentation. i've gone through it and so impressed and there's a question i wrote down. do you think the one year in light of covid is enough time you're asking for an extension of a year. do you think that will be enough time for you? >> thank

i mean the board of supervisors. it's not a good evening tonight because we're here once again calling on you to defund, disband, disarm, abolish the police and kick them in the asses because they're racist, they're homophobic, they are ridiculous and they should get us out of here -- we should get them out of here. there was an article in the bay area just yesterday that said that black people are 4.4 times more likely to be stopped by the sfpd and it is getting worse in the last few years. so what the hell are you doing dicking around, doing nothing, and approving, you know, ridiculous things around sfpd when you should be disarming them, disbanding them, abolishing them and you should be rejecting the racist police contract. actually not thanks because you guys don't do anything and give yourself a job. bye. >> thank you for your comments. operations, let's hear from the next caller >> (caller): hi, my name is kate and i live and work in district 5. i am calling to demand the board of supervisors reject the racist

on behalf of the board, i would like to acknowledge the staff at sfgovtv. who records the meetings and makes the transcript available to the public online. are there any communications. >> during the covid-19 health emergency, members of the board participated in this meeting remotely through live video conference to the same extent as though physically present in their legislative chamber. the board recognizes that the novel coronavirus has made the need for public access more acute and believes it's essential that all communities with and without the internet will have the following options to be able to participate remotely in this meeting. we will accept your correspondence. if you're sending by u.s. mail, address the envelope to san francisco board of supervisors, city hall, 1 carlton goodlett place, san francisco, california. if you're sending via e-mail, send it to bos at sf gov.org. you can watch on 26. due to a broadcasting delay when you're ready to provide testimony, make sure you turn down your television. instead, to listen to the proceedings,

as the only woman of color on this board. >> mr. president, sir. >> i think the findings in here are all true and correct. all of the recitals and the whereases are absolutely right and they could certainly be expanded and when we get to the one, the resolves they could be quite expanded and so that it is not about one elect official. it is really about the focus of hatred that often becomes focused on elect official and we are the man i havetation by the electorate of communities and color, religion, geographic communities. i would like to work with supervisor stefani and supervisor fewer and supervisor mandelman and i would like to make a suggestion that we continue this item one woke and i will work with to really denounce hate, of all sorts, particularly against people who do this as a matter of public service and so i would make a motion to continue this item one week and we'll work with supervisor stefani and mandelman to expand results. >> thank you. >> what were you saying? >> may i respond? >> go ahead. i have two other peop

the board is accepting public comments for items 71 through 106. operations, do we have any public speakers? >> operator: yes. we have four callers in the queue. i will unmute the first caller. >> clerk: okay. welcome, caller. >> can you hear me now? >> clerk: yes, welcome, caller. >> okay. it's david pillpow. here are my brief comments. one other appeals today are proposed to continuance for october 6 through october 20. m.t.a. has already implemented the project, so there's no prejudice to m.t.a. m.t.a. provided new information which i have not yet digested for researched. five, it is extremely difficult for me to submit more information to the board by this friday, either by noon or 5:00 p.m., so one week for me is definitely a hardship. six, yom kippur is monday, so i don't think i can submit anything by friday morning, which is not enough time for anyone to read anything on my appeals. please, seriously. otherwise, i cannot meaningfully participate despite my best efforts to pursue these appeals in good faith, and i think both planning and m.t.

and the board room is closed. committee members will participate remotely in the conference to the extent as if they were physically present. sfgov is streaming the public calling number at this time across the screen. your opportunity to provide public comment is available by call 415-655-0001. once prompted, enter the meeting i.d. for today's meeting, 146-147-0836. you will then dial the pound symbol twice to be connected to the meeting. when you hear the discussions, your line will be muted and in a listening mode. when you hear your item, press star-three and wait until the symptom indicates you are unmuted -- system indicates you are unmuted before you begin your comments. speak slowly and clearly, and make sure that volume is turned down on all your devices. alternatively, i invite you to submit your public comments could you please call item 1. >> clerk: item 1 is an emergency ordinance to temporarily protect workers from adverse action if they test positive for covid-19, are isolating or quarantining or hav

. >> any of the members of the board wishing to speak on this item? >> you have director lipkin. >> ok, director. >> just quickly, and steven, thank you for the presentation. a little bit of the conversation about the operational analysis and trying to get a little bit ahead and one of the things to clarify for director gi. we're tapping into the existing contracts that activate the services as quickly as we can. i know there's a little bit of contractual stuff to work out and there are issues, but we're trying to go as quickly as possible with that critical path as certainly met. >> thank you, director lipkin. any other members? nothing from your end. >> i don't see any more members of the board indicating. >> thank you all. that was all very helpful and i see we have an action item to appoint the interim project director and so, with that, do i have a motion? >> i'll move the item to support. >> and do i have a second? >> i'll second the item. >> so i have a motion and a second. thank you, board members and madam secretary, could you see if we have a

due to the covid-19 health emergency and to protect board members, the city, and the public, the board room and legislative chambers are closed. however, members will be participating in the meeting remotely. committee members will participate in the meeting to the same ee

>> i'll second the item. >> so i have a motion and a second. thank you, board members and madam secretary, could you see if we have any members of the public wishing to speak on this item. >> yes, madam chair, we do have a couple of the members of the public to address you under this item. donald, if you could look to our first caller. >> speaker: i'm excited with the current developments. congratulations to director chang and i want to touch a little bit on the importance of appointing as vice chair. for those of you who do not know who andrew is, he will probably be remembered, andrew used to be an engineer and he's a great engineer. but andrew will be remembered as the primary individual for putting the bay bridge back on track and one that thing they learned is waiting until a project is out of control to get involved is basically too late and have decided not to repeat the same mistakes and this is why andrew is here. with regards to the operation's plan, you may be interested in the plan present to mr. lewis zirinaga in 2015. it is basically modeled over

section p, closed session, the board will go into closed session. us, i call a recess of the regular meeting. so we'll see you all at this meeting and thank you, public, for attending this meeting. >> this is session q and one report of 10 matters of anticipated litigation by a vote absent collins provided direction to the general council in the matter of chip versus sfusd and case number cps-205-9049 board approved a settlement agreement and authorized the general council to pay up to the stipulated amount. that does it for the closed session read out. thank you all. >> thank you. >> all and all a short meeting. >> sounds good. >> be safe. be safe. be good. >> thank you. >> thank you all. >> have a nice evening. bye-bye. >> bye. >> hi, i'm chris manners and you're watching can the coping with covid-19." today i'm going to talk about some of the steps that you can take to stay safe as we slowly lift our restrictions. (♪) >> keep wearing your mask when you're outside your home. there's a board consensus among medical professionals that wearing a mask

joining me is the chair of the board of the trustees of the mexican museum and the vice chair of the ard of trustees, secretary of the board of trustees and others we're available for any questions you may have and that concludes the presentation. thank you. >> mrfk >> madame secretary, do we have members of the public wishing to provide public comment. >> those members of the public wish to comment dial 1-408-418-9388 enter 146 642 8927, press the pound sign twice to be entered in the call and press star 3 to be pressed in the queue. if you're already listening by phone president star 3 if you'd like to provide a comment. we'll allow a few moments. >> there are no callers. >> no members of the public. >> commissioner: i'll close the public comment. let's start with commissioner scott. do you have questions or comments? >> thank you for your presentation. i've gone through it and so impressed and there's a question i wrote down. do you think the one year in light of covid is enough time you're asking for an extension of a year. do you think that will be enough time for you? >> thank y

i'm julie rosenberg, the board's executive director. we will also be joined by a representative from the city department that will be presenting before the board this evening. scott sanchez, deputy zoning administrator for the planning department. the board requests that you turnoff or silence all phones and electronic devices so they will be disturb the proceedings. appellants are given seven minutes each to present their case, and people affiliated with these parties must give comments during these seven-minute periods. members of the public have three minutes to address the board and no rebuttal. our clerk will give you a warning 30 seconds before your time is up. if you have questions about the probable cause, please e-mail board staff. to enable public participation, sfgovtv is broadcasting and streaming this hearing live, and we will have the ability to receive public comment on each item. [inaudible] a link to the live stream is found on the page of our website at sfgov.org/boa. you can join the meetings by computer. go to our web

the board, the system and within the financial services industry. i work closely throughout the board and the system with the other omwi directors at the 12 reserve banks, recognizing the commitment of the board on these important issues is shared by the banks and their leadership. has equal opportunity compliance programs and includes the office of minority and women inclusion. omwi pursuant to the dodd frank act, developed initiatives to ensure fair inclusion of minorities, women, and minority owned and women owned businesses, and all activities of the board. as well as developing standards for assessing diversity policies and practices of regulated entities. the board's omwi outline its activities, successes and challenges. i will highlight two areas of this report. the board shows progress in increasing the level of diversity in senior leadership. in 2019, there were 19 appointments, in which five were minorities and six were women. there are six female directors, which one is african-american. eight division directors are male, of which one is

joining me is the chair of the board of the trustees of the mexican museum and the vice chair of the of trustees, secretary of the board of trustees and others we're available for any questions you may have and that concludes the presentation. thank you. >> mrfk >> madame secretary, do we have members of the public wishing to provide public comment. >> those members of the public wish to comment dial 1-408-418-9388 enter 146 642 8927, press the pound sign twice to be entered in the call and press star 3 to be pressed in the queue. if you're already listening by phone president star 3 if you'd like to provide a comment. we'll allow a few moments. >> there are no callers. >> no members of the public. >> commissioner: i'll close the public comment. let's start with commissioner scott. do you have questions or comments? >> thank you for your presentation. i've gone through it and so impressed and there's a question i wrote down. do you think the one year in light of covid is enough time you're asking for an extension of a year. do you think that will be enough time for you? >> thank you,

good afternoon, president yee, members of the board. joining me today are staff members from the planning department as well as the sfmta. the item before you is an appeal of an emergency project statutory exemption for the sfmta's slow streets phase one project. on april 21, 2020, the planning department determined that the project was statutorily exempt under the california environmental quality act, ceqa, guidelines section 152-69c, also referred to as an emergency statutory exemption, which applies to specific actions to prevent or mitigate an emergency. as described in detail in our appeal response submitted to the board on august 24, the project qualifies as an emergency project statutory exemption. there are two main topics that the appellant has raised that i will address now. topic one relates to the definition of an emergency and how slow streets phase one project is mitigating the emergency. the appellant is implying that the covid-19 public health emergency does not meet the public resources definition of an emergency which i

we just presented this morning to the board of supervisors in their role as the sfmta board talking about the latest findings of the splice. it is clear now that we made the right decision back on april 8 in shutting down the rail system to begin with. the muni bus system is our base of strategic resiliency. and the buses operating out there are significantly better than what we thought we were capable of meeting. we're meeting with our constrained sources. we're getting to the bottom of not just how to repair all the splices, but asking the question, what additional maintenance work can we conduct in the subway given the fact that ridership is lower now in san francisco than it has been in muni 110-year history. all the buildings in the financial district are empty. what we're hearing from owners, building operators and the chamber of commerces in downtown, it's going to be quite a while before they're occupied again. i directed all of our staff to think creatively and big about how long is the optimal length of time to shut down the subway. how much maintenance work can we get caught up

the next item. hearing none, i'll proceed. directors, item 4, is board of directors new and old business. >> chair sesay: we have none. >> secretary: if there are none, i will proceed to call the next item, chair sesay? >> chair sesay: thank you, mr. secretary. >> secretary: directors, item 5 is the executive directors report. >> thank you. good morning, directors. first, i would like to thank you for the opportunity to serve as interim executive director. as we all continue our work to mitigate the impacts of the covid-19 pandemic, and as we look to the future envisioning a state interconnected by rail, stable leadership and a firm commitment to the vision of the agency is critical. and i'm honored and excited to temporarily fill that role. my focus will be on advancing the transbay program by operating the salesforce transit center in a world class cost effective manner, with transit agencies, neighborhood stakeholders. advancing by collaborating with the san francisco peninsula rail program executive steering committee and ensuring all aspects of the

and then it goes to the board. as you know, the legislative process at the board takes some time, too. and it can be hard to predict. i think right now there are a lot of competing priorities out there. obviously it's a very complicated budget season. the board also takes legislative recesses, covid -- >> excuse me. i actually -- i mean, we do know how long -- i don't think anybody disputes that it's going to take 12 months to move the legislation through. but you have some very specific ideas about what we would be substantivively, that we would be looking at? i'm wondering if you could jump to that and get them, you know, sort of enunciated, so that people who are liste listening w subtannively what we're talking about, with regard to the prioritization plan, item number 1 that's addressing the conflicts of interest of and regulatory review. >> yeah. as i alluded to, the scope that i envision for this project is roughly tied to the allegations that have come out of so far the fbis criminal complaints against a num

this will reduce reverberation so the board can hear you. at the appropriate time they'll open the phone line and you'll be prompted to press 1-0 to add to the speaker line. the autoprompt will say it's question and answer time but it's the public comment and you'll be queued up. you'll be notified when it is your turn to speak. when your microphone has been unmuted and you hear the automated voice, give us your name and begin the comment session. i'll start your two minutes when you begin talking. i will give you a 30-second warning when have you 30 seconds remaining and when your time is up i'll say thank you, next caller please. at that point the nod rater will put the speaker back on mute. i'll make the announcement again. item 6, introduction of new or unfinish the business by board members. >> clerk: board members. >> madame chair, i've had one and i've been on a year and don't have much air time to our response act to the park authority. responsibilities to the parking authority. that's a large inventory of assets that ought to be of i

that's permitted but it does require the board to suspend that financial policy for the upcoming period. that's what the legislation before you here today does. >> thank you very much. do you have anything else to add? >> no, madam chair, nothing to add. >> thank you very much. so, i think we'll help-any colleagues have any comments or questions about item number one? seeing none, let's go onto-oh, yes. go ahead. >> i just wanted to say that i'm very supportive of this item. i just wanted the public to know that while this is not normally a prudent budgetary strategy we're in a very very unique and strange year where we have many revenue generating measures on the ballot that we hope will pass in november. that will make this one time use-make the use of one time funds for ongoing costs a prudent strategy right now to teal with crisis we have in the city. because we have potential new revenue coming in that could fulfill those needs in the future. i thought it was important to explain to the public why i'm going to be supportive of this resolution. we do have a plan for those on going c

, the board of supervisors are closed. however, members will be participating in a meeting remotely. this precaution is taken pursuant to the various local, state and directives. committee members will attend and participate in the meeting to the extent as if they are physically present. public comments are on this item. we are streaming the number across the screen and each member will be allowed two minutes to speak. call (415)655-0001. and access code (146)828-6649. and then press pound twice. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussion and you will be muted and in listening mode only. your item of interesting comes up, dial far thre star three ant practises to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or radio. you may submit public comment in the following way. email to myself, the committee clerk. it will be forwarded to the supervisors and included as a part of the official files. items acted upon are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of september

area or the k-boarding area. aving cantonese speaking ambassador was critical and something we addressed immediately within the first early a.m. two hours of opening. as well as looking for opportunities to enhance the operation. the work we had done to prepare for the rail opening really paid off. the station sparkled and i was so honored to see hundreds of staff from across the agency, many of whom have been working exclusively from home, come out and work with our customers and help make the transition smoother. that being said, on monday night, we had to make the difficult -- but i strongly feel -- necessary decision to shift back to buses. every time we make a decision of this scale, we're considering the risk management. and in this case, both the known facts as well as some of the unknowns led to this change. for example, we didn't immediately know how many people we were going to have to quarantine at the transportation management center. we didn't know if fear would keep other staff at home in the subsequ

good afternoon, president yee, members of the board. joining me today are staff members from the planning department as well as the sfmta. the item before you is an appeal of an emergency project statutory exemption for the sfmta's slow streets phase one project. on april 21, 2020, the planning department determined that the project was statutorily exempt under the california environmental quality act, ceqa, guidelines section 152-69c, also referred to as an emergency statutory exemption, which applies to specific actions to prevent or mitigate an emergency. as described in detail in our appeal response submitted to the board on august 24, the project qualifies as an emergency project statutory exemption. there are two main topics that the appellant has raised that i will address now. topic one relates to the definition of an emergency and how slow streets phase one project is mitigating the emergency. the appellant is implying that the covid-19 public health emergency does not meet the public resources definition of an emergency which i