online 5 and 6, we keep the park hours but shall be subject to the penalty setforth in the park article 10 and i want to pet put put with the exception of sleeping violation. this is a point that i forgot to make earlier. that is this. identify talked -- i have talked to people who sleep in our parks. i don't have the data that shows this but the vast majority of people that sleep in the park are women. i know this concern came from supervisor campos around members of our lgbt community and homeless. by the way, many of you know i stayed in a shelter over night and i saw the bias against lgbt particularly against transgender members. it is not to blame people in our shelter system. our shelter system is a mime mic crow -- micro system. there is a lot of bias and miss understanding around transgender. i heard a lot from women that say they feel safer sleeping in the parks as well. we have a limited number of beds and that is the reality. acid lie, i remember when sfpd presented this legislation stated that they understood that people had to sleep on the streets and therefore made an exce

the park will be closed at golden gate, the park will be closed. what's going to happen to the 50-200 people that are sleeping there? >> it's already illegal to do sleeping in the park. it's already in legal to be camping in the park. with the hours ordinance should it pass, we have an additional layer that you simply cannot be in the park at that time. so, our park patrol unit, we have 18 park patrol officers available for enforcement although that is on three round the clock shifts. so at any given time there is 3 officers available citywide but they are on patrol around-the-clock and they will be out patrolling for the enforcement of all of those ordinance sections. >> so you will enforce the ordinance when it says that the park is closed, you will enforce it to make sure no one is there. >> our park patrol are around the park to patrol to the degree that we have resources to do that currently and that will continue. >> okay. presumably if you enforce it that means you are going to remove the 50-200 people that are there? >> if the ordinance pass

stadium, not the park. >> correct. candle stick stadium. >> what will be the level of the park enforcement officers? >> well, again, i think we have 4,000 acres, 220 parks and they are broken up into 6 or 7 park service areas. to put this in perspective, i think we would like to have a shift of park patrol officers in every park service area to assist park users and keep an eye on our neighborhood parks throughout our system and our largest regional park such as maclaren park and golden gate park are large enough, maclaren park is over 4 00 acres and golden gate park over a thousand acres to be broken up. it's important to mention what these officers do everyday. our park patrol officers are not just about enforcement. they are ambassadors, about education, they are also keeping an eye on special events and answer questions to members of the public and lock and unlock bathrooms and they offer a pretty broad away of functions for park users. >> thank you. so, sit safe to say that you would enjoy say if we were to increas

no. 1, the issue of vandalism. parks and recreation did an amazing job at land use committee really articulating the problem and show casing the need for addressing the problem about what we need to do about vandalism. i agree that this is an issue and an expensive issue. the basic problem with this ordinance is we are ticketing which is not vandalism but articulating something that is not criminal. what i had an issue was with cid lie. during land use committee another issue we have in our city is with car break -ins. it's a huge problem. what i have not heard is a proposal to ban people walking on sidewalks to parked car. vandalism to cars is incredible. if we found an issue to address that, i would be the first to propose it. we are not proposing to banned people from walking lying by cars. if a police officer drives by, no one is going to put out their tools for break-ins. which is why we should not criminalize the behavior for being in the park. the second issue that came up is when vandalism happens. numerically 12

- of the people coming from the park. i would like to make a modest proposal, if the police don't want to cite people at night, they can cite them during the day. or if the health professionals, i have to take the issues at night coming into the inter sunset during the day. take a lunch break there and you will see what i mean. i share supervisor campos saying what's going to happen when they are taken out of the park. they have already started camping during the day. thank you. >> this you very much. next speaker. >> thank you for the opportunity to speak. my name is diane carpal . i have lived here for 20 years. i sent an e-mail to the board of supervisors in anticipation for the october 29th hearing on the limitation of the park hours. basically there is a few concerns. there is an assembly bill 5, homeless bill of rights. it maybe good to have an analysis done on any existing laws in san francisco. there is a few of them in here. sit live, the park restrictions, aggressive solicitation ban which replace the aggressive

- of the people coming from the park. i would like to make a modest proposal, if the police don't want to cite people at night, they can cite them during the day. or if the health professionals, i have to take the issues at night coming into the inter sunset during the day. take a lunch break there and you will see what i mean. i share supervisor campos saying what's going to happen when they are taken out of the park. they have already started camping during the day. thank you. >> this you very much. next speaker. >> thank you for the opportunity to speak. my name is diane carpal

humbling experience for us at the parks alliance. let's have another round of applause for carina and lynn and all of the volunteers who have made such an incredible contribution to this effort. (applause) >> and now i think phil, ready to go ahead and do the ribbon cutting. >> thank you, matt. all right, we're getting there. so, a couple things. i want to give a big shout out, ron davis is here, the founder of the lafayette park or san francisco mime troop, right, ron? give a big shout out for ron. [cheering and applauding] >> that's for you. >> i have the honor of being arrested in this park in 1965. [laughter] cheer cheers >> under different management, i can say, had we performed for this guy we would not have been arrested. >> i'd be in it. >> he'd be in it, right. he's almost as good as we were. 1965, it was a very different commission and they took away our permit. we had done three shows. they didn't like the play. it was an aclu issue, it was called free speech. so, we've declared that the little park over there where i was a

>> the parking operation, the competitive parking, well, of course, it has been the market place, is now, the surface lots are now being replaced with the development projects. and so to the extent that those surface lots go away and there is not additional parking being provided in those projects then our parking should increase in value. >> so, but specifically do we know right now, just in terms of whether the space is or under this or these lots, in the immediate vicinity more demand because of the developments going on? or status quo, in terms of the amount of parking available? you know, the market is a supply and demand and the price is a function of that and so just trying to understand. >> i would say that it is looking opportunityistic for the port in demands for its parking. >> you mean more demand? >> yes, more demand. what is sort of tempers that is our developments that are planned for these lots, 322-1 is a project that you are going to hear about shortly. and so, but there may be a replacement in the parking told, and i believe that brad is going to jonathan is going

the region. it's not a remote pristine national park. it's part of the urban fabric for san francisco and to be utilized for recreation. it's to be intertwined for the city. it's those including with dogs. there has been a long coexistence between dog uses and non-dog uses. this area has a direct and signature impact on our city and it's residents . it is important for the national park service to take into account the needs of san francisco the use of the dgnra, we did invite the dgnra to participate to the restriction but they declined to participate. decades the dgnra has put rules regarding this access. more than a decade ago the dgnra attempted to propose rules to restrict access and the plan was adopted and over turned by the court's. in 2011 the national park service came forward with a new proposal, again dramatically restricting dog access. colleagues you may recall that we passed a resolution by a 10-1 vote opposing that plan. now, the national park service has come forward with a supplemental proposal that still has significant

i was in the park yesterday. survey i asked 20 people if they thought this money was going to the city, and they'll think it is. so. john: so what if they think it's going to mars. the park is nice. >> it would not have the taxes. we have the money left over. the park could be just as good. john: well, it certainly is true that the park is very commercial these days. but buying and selling going on. holiday gifts. very commercial. on the other hand, the public seems fine with that. >> its and look very nice. a different story. >> a lot of the things that they should be doing. you should -- john: some money. >> that's right. you will study. if everyone would feel just as good. >> is a very public. nobody has viewed it as privatized, and the final answer to these arguments, every dollar that is earned by concessions and sponsorships and events goes right back into the park. all that money is earned in these ways. the way we provide private skating complex skating for free which we do is from those booze and a sponso

the nps and tended to address the issue of impact on city parks. the.walker legislation, i still point of concern and will continue our discussion of nps and you supervisor on this issue. we understand that the nps is still taking public comment on the environmental impact study. we will continue to monitor that process very closely. we'll stay conversation with you and nps as we move to finalize the plan and the implementation. >> thank you. just a couple of questions. if you look at the environmental document produced by the national park service, did it indicates very likely that an increase in the level of recreational use by private and commercial dog walking will occur at nearby dog walking areas. it's unclear to me why the analysis, why the national park service came to that conclusion since people from all over the city use gg nra. does the department believe that a reduction in dog access, at the gg nra will result in increased dog usage at our city parks? >> that is a very fair point. unfortunately, usually depend on the type of environmen

looks like in relation to the number of parking permits to the number of parking spaces. >> the approach we took is to recommend the city increase the number of blue placard spaces to be consistent with the amendments likely to be made to the aga that would call for 4 percent of metered parking spaces to be made blue placard zones. we /tkw-pbt look at the number of cars in the city or the number of blue placards. it just was easier to have us conform to federal law for percent and then to go with additional changes such as better monitoring of the users that a monitoring by dmv of those who issue the placards, maybe some improvement or tightening of the criteria. that can help control or improve the turnover of parking because as it is in general there are more cars registered in san francisco than there are curb side spaces, period. irrespective of blue placards, there would be no way we could establish any ratio, because as you do that, as the population shifts and as more people age and more aged develop a disability you wind up with larger and larger numbers of blue placards. the ide

the point is, the park is making money from the tourism. en about a month later they auction off a portion to private ranchers and they're also making money now wait. all that money goes back into custer state park to pay for operations of the park. so they're paying their own way. john: more benefit from profit. coming of, how government made the indians poor and how private property made america rich. ♪ john: have you ever been to an indian reservation in temecula release sought serious poverty and alcoholism and drug abuse. something about indians that makes them lazy or irresponsible . when india's own their own land they do about as well as other americans. >> nobody chooses poverty. we have been legislated by the federal government's both in the united states and canada. john: they have been taking care of you. that sounds like the best deal. >> well, by taking care of us that means providing social welfare programs. the only way to break the cycle of poverty, i believe, is by the recognition that every other canadian and american take

district 6 has the as smallest parks in the city. when we have the ability to create open spaces in the district. it's something that we really would like to celebrate. i want to bring up two individuals who are really instrumental in allowing us to make these parks what they are. please comp. e -- come up. this is a long commendation. this is a neighborhood that was previously gated up and we have many members of our rincon hill.al star as i understand was behind this idea. he's worked at emerald funds for 15 years. he's served on the board of the west bay. i want to recognize this board for long-term committed to the city. they know this is not their only project. they are very committed to this neighborhood. they understand the public benefits are good for their business as well as their residents and their neighbors. as i mentioned before, the district has a small acreage of parks. 1.4 acres per park. members of the rin conhill was concerned that there wasn't park space available for many of the residents that are slowly moving i

the point is, the park is making money from the tourism. ut a month later they auction off a portion to private ranchers and they're also making moy now wait. all that money goes back into custer state park to pay for operations of the park. so they're paying their own way. john: more benefit from profit. coming of, how govenment made the indians poor and how private property made america rich. as a business owner, i'm constantly putting out fires. so i deserve a small business credit card with amazing rewards. with the spark cascard from capital one, i get 2% cash back on ery purchase, every day. i break my back around here. finally soone's recognizing me with unlimited rewards! meetings start at 11, cindy. [ male announcer get the spark business card from capital one. choose 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every d. what's in your wallet? i need your timesheets, larry! ♪ john: have you ever been to an indian reservation in temecula release sought serious poverty and alcoholism and drug abuse. something about indians that mak

we found a lot to be proud of as far as the park. the numbers of people living in this actual park has actually stagnated so looking to the happy for. but at the same time, the fact that there is any people living in a park is still cause a kind to keep working. our paper made some suggestions that we thought would be reasonable to tweak some current practices and maybe it could be brought down to a new baseline. these include some outreach to reach people who are camping over night and more appropriate city workers and we suggested taking demographic data by intuition and experience and making it more objective and putting it in objective terms that can be analyzed for patterns in homelessness and the code be represented more accurately and signage. that's it. >> that's your presentation? >> yes. >> okay. colleagues, would you like to speak on the item? >> just a quick question. i like to get to the point. quick question in terms of how many people we are talking about who presently living in the park? >> that fluctuates based on the

but the placard is meant to increase parking access for us. the payment exemption reduces that because it encourages or allows people to park as long as possible, up until the street needs cleaning, which can be 3 days or a week in some parts of the city. it's also important that this is a disability accommodation. it's not an income-base the or economic benefit. the payment exemption started years ago because the parking technology then was not accessible. you had to be able to grasp coins, lift your hand, put it in a slot, turn a lever, you had to be able to do things that maybe you weren't able to do. now with technology, with smart phones that you can pay by phone with debit cards, with any number of modes and the plan to buy new meters with lowered heads so people can read what's the time frame you are buying, the technology now is accessible. other cities that went to requiring meter payment found it did help increase turnover. philadelphia is one of those major examples, but in my own town of st. louis also. i checked with some of my fam

the streets which are turning many of the areas into parking lots. this program applies to all types of roadside vehicles which includes commercial vehicles. the sf mta worked with hope so they would offer supportive housing and resources for those who may need those resources. our hope is to have individual vehicles stored as long as they participate in the case management of the goal of securing permanent housing. on any given night, i used to see regularly about 20 over sized vehicles. on -- lincoln and see many of those, they include full physical if if -- prior to implementing the program, the sf issued warnings using informational flyers placed on vehicles parked in these locations. since the flyers, we have heard positive feedback from residents. for that i want to thank my co-supervisors, breed and mar and supervisor's yee as well. and we'll hear from sf mta and we have captain here for any questions. thank you for your patience. duffy is here also. with that, mr. yee.> >> good afternoon, bond yee. as you know this is a long standing issue of

for the future we want to partner with rec and park to get some funding forbid the rec and parks trail fund and others. in some cases the application will be more competitive if you use the core as a partner to perform the work >> thank you for your time and attention i want to show you a 5 minute video of our anniversary and some folks to say a few brief words about the projects they've worked on if that's okay. >> that's okay. >> i'm a nerd when it comes to computers. >> this is a rough neighborhood as we were 2k3wr0u7 as kids they therapist going to be in jail or on drugs. i didn't think i would have a job i might do this when i'm trying i want to stay open the streets until my time is up. >> i struggle in learning but you once i hit high school i gave up, you know. >> what was it like it was not all that happy so i decided one day to get up and bought me to the core. >> i decided to stop acting like a child and be a man. >> up. >> up. >> down. >> down. >> oh, man what did i get myself into. >> i have to wake up aaron four or five to get her at the 7. >> wake up at what time oh, no,

it's one of the park parcels in phase one. the shipyard community parcels there are green and those are comprised of vacant land and studios of building 813 which is slaetd for king tech incubator. then i'm going skip the enforceable obligation and go to the disposition. for the park parcels, it's very similar to transbay where we would retain them temporarily to fulfill our development obligations which would mean to ensure they are developed as parked and we would transfer them to the item a: authorizing the issuance of tax allocation bonds for the mission bay south redevelopment project area in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $70,000,000, and approving and directing the execution of an indenture of trust, and a bond purchase contract, and approval of other related documents and actions, mission bay south redevelopment project area. discussion and actionn resolution no. 52-20133 page 3 of 3 bb update on the status of hunters point shipyard local contracting and construction workforce hiring; hunters point shipyard

this means that the city would make it easier for us to find parking nearby. i've done my own informal surveys around the greater civic area and found a lot of problems with people parking in blue zones or in accessible loading zones and not getting tickets and not displaying the placard. but mta's already [inaudible] add more blue zones. that's something we can do. we don't need state approval, authority or money for this. the next slide to increase enforcement of placard abuse, and here again this doesn't require any state law change, but because we talked to the head of security for mta and they gave us the stats on how long and difficult it is to enforce, they're adding three more pco's to the placard detail. we also want the dmv to find a way to code in to the placard number the photo id of the placard holder. right now most people either have a california id, a california driver's license or for seniors and disabled we also have this photo id card that allows for a discount on transit so there's multiple ids that are government ids that can be used and co

if you are mostly charging for the parking, time takes care of itself. i mean, professor shoop said that. you don't need time limits, all you do is have the appropriate charge. another thing, i hope you are not looking forward to making any money from this, adding charging, because you are not going to. a lot of people were parking free and they are going to figure out they can use muni, they can park less time, it's going to balance out. their magic number of 470, hope that's enough, not too much, whatever. let's start this thing going in california. >> thanks. >> herbert weiner. >> mr. weiner ?oo . >> herbert weiner. by and large i support the spirit of what is being done. i think you should crack down on people using them illegally and use whatever methods you need to do this. but i have a problem with charging for parking. it will raise reverend gnaw for mta and maybe a political deal was struck where you would implement these changes you have parking. if you wanted to be equitable, you would go after the bicyclists which has president been done to da

i want to speak on behalf of many folks who are working for the park lapd's. so on behalf of parks and presidio trust we join rec and park as clearly the leader so we can work as a community i want to pass out drafts which is in 3 languages. we want to achieve the endorsements the rec and park logo would be in the blue area but the role out would happen in the springtime. i want to end with a short quote by a former child growing up in san francisco. i exported every foot of the valley thoounl u stoounl through the thick brush and following the clay before it met the pacific. i traced who i am to those years of growing up in our house on the dunes adams. thank you for your time >> commissioners we have several cards for comment. we do have public comment. so (calling names) you can come up in any order. >> hi, i'm sally i'm with sf dog. i want to say i went to the website the rec and park website to find information on what this bill of rights was and there was nothing on the website. all i got was the agenda under the spring documents is i went online and it's