every e-mail a member of the public sends to the m.t.a. board is responded to by secretary boomer who does a fantastic job. we do make ourselves available. we go to as many public meetings as we can. when projects are coming before the m.t.a. board or we're having e-mails from neighbors saying they don't like a project we go out to see first-hand. there's no replacement for eyes on the ground to see what it looks like. >> commissioner: okay. >> again, what the public sees is the tip of the iceberg. as you do, we have incredibly full agendas to keep the meetings moving along and approve the projects to get them on the grouped. -- ground. i will stand by the fact my board makes itself available and we all have full-time jobs. it's a volunteer job and labor of love for all of us and i'm proud of what we achieved on the m.t.a. board and what staff has achieved in the last six to seven years. i will stand by that and stand by my entire board and staff and agency. >> commissioner: i don't need you all to comment on this, i just thought of somethi

of the technology and not by the public. these are some main points. i guess, again, i'll reiterate that the board of supervisors is committed to investigating and adopting legislation including recommendations for a dedicated office of emerging technology with appropriate staffing to ensure the city government is adequately nimble and responsive to address impacts of emerging technologies in san francisco. so those are some of the highlights in which we basically had reworded and we needed to say something about that on the record. >> commissioner safai: okay. i'm going to let chair -- we'll accept those in a comment. can we do public comment and come back to the amendments? any person of the public wish to come forward and speak? you have 2 minutes to speak. if you have any documents hand them to the clerk. please come forward. >> good afternoon, supervisors. lori leaderman. i'd like to thank supervisor yee for his leadership. i support the resolution. it establishes vital guidelines for the consideration of allowing new te

it is something that can reinforce the public good. it can probably minimize the deleterious or negative effects. waze has the capacity, as anthony says, of producing enormous amounts of useful data with respect to metropolitan planning, infrastructure planning and that kind much thing, but it will tells members of my family if i stopped off at the dubliner and i worry about that. with respect to involvement in the space program, i agree with rich. this has been an accelerant. it is cost effective, a quit integrator of technologies. the one tesla i had my eye on is on its way to mars now, so i'm out of the business for a while. but i think it is a real opportunity for us in terms of technology transfer, both in context of national security, but even more so towards internally the goods of civil society and the transference to civil society that is the real opportunity. rich, you have touched that a number of times in terms much opportunities. let me go to the audience now. we have a rich array of attendees this morning from a number of

they work for those who know the rules, but not for the general public. dbi's rules of demolition are vague, and i think planning's are over kind of complicated and difficult to interpret, and, you know, there's that area between the two where you can be not a dbi demobut a planning demo, which just doesn't make any sense. these should be -- the public should be able to look at a building and kind of understand that it's a demo, or not, and it's not clear. the public brought up a building that you can see through, but it's not a demoby anybody's definitions. that just doesn't work. it hassto pass a logic test, and i don't think they do. most planning staff and dbi staff have starts down paths. i've heard comments from commissioners that can make that definition a lot easier. the difficulty is when do we discourage demolition or when do we say it's okay to demo a building? we certainly want to discourage it when it's a historic resource and it fits in the neighborhood character. we want to discourage it

first discuss the public seat. it's our recommendation to the appointment to the public seat be continued until the next lafco meeting. three affirmative votes are required to appoint to that seat, and commissioner pollock may not vote for herself, so we're requesting the continuance so that you're able to consider appointing to the alternate seat, and in the meantime, commissioner pollock will remain as a holdover pursuant to the government code and to the lafco's policies and procedures. regarding the alternate seat, it is possible for the commission to remove the current alternate from the public seat, as you know, removal can occur at any time, and for without cause. the commission may pain a new commissioner -- excuse me, a new alternate to this seat, and this individual should be able to assist lafco in its decision to fill the public seat. we've posted a vacancy notice for the alternate seat, and we have an applicant. she is here today. her name is miss shanti singh, and she is here to provide some comments.

the citizenry is depending on us as the stewards of the public trust. credible reporting, timely storing, advertising, promotions, partnerships all play a role in keeping the lights on both at the workplace and in journalist homes. we have been trying to walk this talk at the missouri school of journalism since 1908. i would like to add a bonus point. leadership is the key to success. i would like to thank mike jenner for his leadership is the interim executive editor. his tenure started at one of those, just for a few months, mike, almost 18 months later i did not keep my promise. he has done a phenomenal.job and we will soon announce a new executive editor for the columbia missouri and and mike will go back to being the chair full-time which we enjoyed his good work but thank you for leading a great editorial team, for training great students to go out to the industry, and for setting a blistering pace for journalism. a job well done. mark. i recognize i just made mike uncomfortable, but that's okay. another person i would like to acknowledge is not he

i ask the public works if they are -- we don't have money to -- for the business, only for the [ inaudible ]. well, i don't know. how can i get some help? okay. thank you. >> thank you. is there any other general public comment? okay. so we are going to move to item number nine. [agenda item read] . >> commissioners, is there any discussion? i'm sorry. do you have a presentation on that? >> i do. >> sorry. hi, dan. sorry about that. >> good afternoon. president kwon, commissioners, dan wade, and today i'm here to present and request your approval of the march 18 revised water system improvement program. you may recall last time we requested changes to the program was march 2016, and schedules were extended for three projects in february 2017 to allow additional time for administrative closeout of the tunnel, the seismic upgrades of beta vision three and four and security system upgrades. and so to summarize what we're requesting as part of the march 2018 proposed revised wisa, we're requesting scope changes or refinements of to several project the most of which is the groundwater recovery

she is committed to the public service and community. the carpenter's union and its 36,000 members stand alongside [buzzer] [mic cut out] >> supervisor safai: next speaker. >> i'm janet clyde, a small business owner in the north beach district and i have known gail for over 10 years and watched her develop through her work at community housing partnership and i just can't recommend her highly enough in her position and i guess what i see as a san franciscan is her work with families and her work with children and her work bringing people up and i think when we look at the port and issues around the port and activating the port, i think her knowledge of what's needed and people who aren't at the table. there are a lot of people who aren't at the table and i think gail represents a constituency that really needs to be at the table adjacent to our port, our families, low-income families, seniors and people looking for economic opportunities out there. you know, [buzzer] [mic cut out] >> supervisor safai: thank you, ma'am. next speaker. >> un

o doing things for the public good. we had that first challenge where we're seeing the marketplace develop products in the commercial market that may not translate back into the public sector which is something that a record here at brookings, or vice versa we're seeing the government not able to keep pace with the private sector is doing and i think that's somewhat problematic when we look at government funding to r&d, something that supported public technology. i also think public good technologies require some level of architecture that protects citizens. i think the second pair will talk more about that in terms of civil society but there's a challenge. it public good technology that aside for healthcare that's his eye for transportation, and by mental systems, military, do not have those protections in place which i think john, , good that your question, it creates a different definition of what we should be looking at look at public good technology. i also think it many of us in some have been watching the news, wh

library's the bridge at main. public comment is welcome. break, the council will take a 15 minute break. item 7, information item. sf digital equity and the disability community. this presentation will introduce the council to the san francisco digital equity initiative and playbook. there will then be a discussion with the council on ways to engage the disability community on further user research and what's needed to better serve the tech needs of persons with disabilities. presentation by alex banh. digital inclusion officer, committee on information technology, city and county of san francisco. public comment is welcome. item 8, information item. better market street. an overview of the better market street project which proposes to bring transformative safety, transit and street scape update grades to 2.2 miles of market street, from octavia boulevard to steurt street. presentation by similaren bertrang, project manager, doesn't of public works. item 89, public comment. item not on today's agenda but within the juri

at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may odds the commission for up to three minutes. i did have a number of speaker cards. >> president hillis: thank you, jonas. you can lineup on the screen side of the room. >> hi. good afternoon. also in the chronicle this morning was the article about bold san francisco proposal to curtail warming with trees, and i think i've mentioned this before, but i -- can i have the overhead, please. that was a yard that was no more. that yard was flat lotted, and what i call w. hotelification was done, and the inside was brought to the outside. so when you get to the residential design guidelines, i think this is something you need to look at because this is happening in a lot of projects where they're just taking the yard and getting rid of all the nature and

the clerk: thank you. is there any other general public comment? seeing none we'll take a quick moment to thank everyone who's here and how of course for me it makes leaving difficult and has made the last 10 years at the board of appeals an interesting and pleasurable experience. i have the highest regard for the people in the city family and it's you who have kept me here the past three decades. thank you for coming tonight. it means a great deal to me. now we can move on to item number 2, with, commissioners comments and questions. >> i have a few comments. we wish her the best and sure she'll be welcomed in our after meeting drinks if she so chooses. i do want to make public a little discussion on the process. when cynthia first announced she was going to retire, she and hr department of the city were quite helpful in preparing the process and taking the process through its fruition. we received 23 applications and interviewed competent applicants. out of that at our february 21st meeting in closed session the commission decided we'd offer the p

i want to distinguish these two terms from the public guardian. there's some confusion about the role and the inner play. the public guardian is a program that's also operated by our department and this program oversees conservatorships for adults with cognitive impairments, dementia like alzheimer's decide. -- disease. public conservatorships tend to be established for the life span of the conserve person. when the act was passed the intention was really to end lengthy, indeterminate and involuntary commitments that were really complon at that time. the model that was established under the act is a recovery model. it's really based on the understanding that mental illness is treatable. i have some codes here. 5150 might be a term that many are familiar with. a 5150 hold can be used for danger to self or danger to others. most individuals that are held on a 5150 generally stabilize within that 72 hour period. they might be released even after a few hours. it's a much smaller percentage of mentally ill individuals that do not recover within a few da

i'm representing the department of public health. i'm a senior inspector with the environmental health branch, and i oversee the day-to-day operations of the mobile food facility program. we did provide -- i don't know if it's on the overhead, but i'm just placing one of the sides of the brochures that we give out to public kind of describing the mobile food facility classifications just to draw attention as our permitting process to the plan review of the designated carts or trucks or trailers, the minimum requirement of the construction to relate to those classifications. but when an applicant comes in for a permit, i start off the conversation with two primary questions. one being where do they want to vend? sometimes they don't have an idea yet, so we discuss dpw or planning requirements based on where they want to start operating. and a lot of times, they refer them to go to department of public works to initiate the discussion before pursuing a permit with us just to make sure they can lock in the locations that they are hoping

i don't discount members of the public making complaints. i think dpa could also involve city agencies with how the complaint process works out. they all have westbounds -- websit websites. when it comes from a person officially doing work with the san francisco police department on duty and that person sees behaver that needs to be corr t corrected it needs to be brought to the department's attention to handle that. if you give this power to the dpa what the chief is asking res and the department would like, under the charter the chief without a complaint can investigate anything through the department. we ask that we are neildly notified and receive the documentation so if we need to -- our preference is to keep us as the first line to handle interdependental issues with members of our department to keep the city, state and federal agencies within our partnership. >> anything different or -- anything we haven't heard that director henderson or the chief want to add to this? >> noted from -- not from me, sir. >> nothing differently. >> okay.

at this time, during this time as we discuss the ordinance before public comment? >> well, i want the definition of the word "promptly" in section 1.114, subsection f. >> chairperson d. chiu: i'm sorry. section? 1.114 subsection f. so this would be page 5? >> i don't know, there are so many versions, it's my page. >> chairperson d. chiu: okay, so on your proposed amendment, it's page 3? >> no, it's page 5, you're right. you did supply, i can't find the one you gave me at the beginning of the meeting. >> so to clarify, i believe commissioner kopps -- >> okay, you recommend, or you don't recommend, but you say it can be clarified by a regulation? >> i believe commissioner kopp is referring to communication on page 5, line 22. >> page 5 of what? >> the larger document with blue and yellow highlighting included in your agenda packet. >> okay. >> chairperson d. chiu: commissioner kopp, did you want to amend the ordinance? >> commissioner q. kopp: i would prefer but i suppose for speed in dealing with this, let it be done by regulation. but it is an inexact word. could we

any members of the public comment on item four. >> public: thank you supervisors. taxi workers alliance, mark rueberg. i want to thanks supervisor peskin for bringing this forward. sb-182 was really just piling it on to a whole bunch of other laws and rules that treat cab drivers unfairly visa vi transportation network company drivers. and actually treats everybody who pays a business license fee in san francisco unfairly as opposed to tnc drivers because they are the only ones who are exempted under state law to my knowledge. so, this will inject a little bit more fairness into it and owing to the fact that cab drivers would always be exempted at least during the period that this lawsuit goes forward. and we hope and pray for its success. as you are keenly aware, i'm sure, cab drivers have been suffering mightily over the past few years owing to the discrepancies in regulations between the two forms of service, which are really identical or so close to it that you can't make that distinction [bell]. >> public: and i just urge you to pass this. it will be of some h

again, as my colleagues just mentioned, this is under the general public comment, and i also still wanted to echo that the topic which you've mostly been hearing about, which is tantamount to demolition, our members live in the city as well, we have approximately 6,000 members who live in the city, so we're definitely concerned about anything that -- any changes that would eliminate their ability, that would so weaken them in terms of being demolished -- using those rules to sort of work around an eviction. i also want to note that the timer doesn't seem to be going. >> secretary ionin: sorry. we'll dock you a minute. >> so what i'll do also is read portions of a letter that we wrote to mayor farrell regarding factory built housing. and in particular, i want to mention the way that factory built housing and the lejs wlags that affects factory built housing may also end up applying to and being relevant to other forms of factory built constructions such as hotels. so i'll read the portions of this as much as i can. our union represents approximately 13,000 hospitality workers in san franci

we'll take public comment. now is the time to make public comment on the items be propose proposed f ed for continuance. >> okay. do i have to agree with the continuance? >> okay. >> president hillis: we're not deciding on the project, we were deciding whether to continue it or not. >> i was hoping you would hear it so that it wouldn't be continued. that's all. >> president hillis: now's your time to state that rational for it, but not on the project, just on the continuance. all right go grab your papers. we'll take the next -- >> all right. i would like it to be continued. >> president hillis: which item, ma'am. >> all of them, really. all of them, really. >> president hillis: are you here for a specific item, though? >> what? >> president hillis: are you here for a specific item? >> no. is this the meeting that was posted about the million dollar budget for the homeless? is this the meeting? >> clerk: no. i think you've got the wrong hearing room. >> they told me the wrong meeting. so where's that meeting at? >> clerk:

>> well, i would defer to the office of public finance. i don't know which is the actual constraint, whether it's the -- 3.25% of discretionary revenue, i believe that's more of the active constraint, but you are correct, that the city needs to have an assets to pledge. >> it does not compete with the g.o. bonds against -- >> correct, that's right. the g.o. bonds hit the property tax directly, you see it on your property taxes that you are paying x dollars to fund x bond, by bond. whereas the taxes the general fund bucket that does not appear on the property tax rate. and so the debt payments for the c.o.p. program are competing for all other general fund, and that's why we cap it at 3.25% so we are not going above and beyond and spending all of our revenue on just debt payments. >> ok. page 11, the seawall, earthquake safety program, eligible programs costs. there's an audit report out now on the prebond sale and lack of specificity, and i would venture the capital planning committee plays a role in that. below these programs that are high

scott walton from the department of homelessness. and public works. >> we are appreciative for the award and thanks to spur and city government for making this possible. the port of san francisco provided a central water front center with a home and a place for us to assist the persons experiencing homelessness. the three of us would like to thank elaine forbes the port executive director for the nomination for this award. tom carter has the support of the special projects director and brad benson and the division. i also want to say tom as you noted in the video participated in the shared efforts of gaining and maintaining the support of our site neighbors. we want to thank the doi dogpat association. and it's amazingly functional and i think think paul as the lead architect and leading the landscape group including many people and wanted us to appreciate the construction work of the ddr construction and treaty construction and the design space modular. their work brought this together and it's a beautiful space floating on top of a street for

so the workshop cafe is open to the public. that's what it is. the different features of the workshop cafe has, such as having to pay to sit in a reserved seating area or get a monitor is a service that is offered to the public. i know the za talked about a membership, that's called on app. and when you went into the workshop cafe, they have a feature you can download the app to add the time like you do with the park mobile, like the lyft or Über, you have no obligation to go back there. it's not a membership organization. it's not we work. it's not impact hub. it is open to anyone. anyone walking down the street can go into the workshop cafe and access any part of it. i understand the concern about the size of the restaurant in comparison to the seating area. again, food and beverage is served throughout. if you walk through any of new cafes opening in downtown san francisco and you look at the size of the counter where the baristas are working and the size and the area, i would argue 90% of them are more than a third of the space where people ar

if there's any member of the public that would like to comment on item number one, seeing none, public comment is closed. all right colleagues, is there a motion? >> supervisor fewer: yes, i'd like to make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor cohen: all right. we'll take that without objection. thank you. madam clerk, could you do us a favor and call items two, three, and four together. >> clerk: yes. [ agenda items two, three, and four read ] >> supervisor cohen: all right. so before us, we have three resolutions for concession stand leases in the international terminal in sfo. the best part about all of this is the combined leases will bring a minimum of $9.7 million in revenue to the city and county of san francisco, and we've got our friend, cassy widener from the airport to tell us all about it. >> good morning, chair cohen. >> supervisor cohen: good morning. >> cathy windendener for the s francisco airport. we are asking for three new leases in the international terminal a, with sfp america for a manufacture food haul, black point coffe

next item, please. >> clerk: item 2, public comment is the time for the public to comment on items not on the commission's agenda and allows the public to comment on future agenda items. >> president adams: do we have any public comment on items not on today's agenda. >> hi. my name is sage and i'm coming from a request today with a coalition of small business owners that all have to do with the pet industry. we are fighting a battle against a new chain store andum willing shop that's coming into our neighborhood? and i'm not exactly sure if we need to do a formal presentation and if i'm requesting to be on for next month to do a formal presentation or if there's any other way to get your assistance or endorsement to having their conditional use permit blocked because of the significant harm they will do to small businesses in san francisco. >> president adams: okay. great. thank you. location? >> noe valley, so there's ten -- four of us directly in neovalley, and the coalition is a combination of ten other stores in the area. >> president adams: okay. great. thank you. we know what it

in addition to all the other avenues for public comment. moving on, our process. we've had 14 meetings in this rates cycle since september of 2014. we've seen the consultant, the report, the staff reports and the -- all the charts and tables and everything else. we hold our meetings here at the headquarters of the commission. we try to create a very transparent and open process. unfortunately we've had very limited public attendance and very limited public comment at our meetings, however, we are aware of comments from the 218 process as well as several of us attended the cac meetings where they gots the rates package and there was a lot of comments from that very vocal group, which we've taken into consideration. when we look at what is -- what the -- the out comes of the rate proposal, we really have confidence in the staff. they have been very open, they have been very detailed. they answer all the questions, they are very timely with everything. we know that there's really a modest reallocation of cost and a lot of that may be consultant

it made it harder for the executive branch to suppress and sensor publication based on claims of national security. since that historic case, mr. abrams has argued more first amendment and media law cases before the united states supreme court than any lawyer in our country's history. he has successfully represented landmark communications in its case against the state of virginia, and successfully established the principle that the press may not be punished for printing the truth about how a public official performs public duties. he has handled many important cases regarding libel, lakes, and the confidentiality of journalistic sources. in addition to the new york times, his clients include abc, nbc, cbs, cnn, time magazine, business week, the nation, and standard & poor's financial services. he represented the brooklyn museum of art when mayor rudy giuliani decided to censor the art there as being sacrilegious. as a testament to his stance on first amendment rights, mr. abrams has more recently helped argue a side more aligned with conservative views in the famous case of citizens unit

the public will be made aware of in advance of the may 1st board meeting. i would say all the numbers are being worked out, but probably more than one permit that would be issued, but some sort of cap on the number of permits. >> i think it's important to cap the number that are on the road so that we can see how it works out before we expand the program. have you thought about -- may 1st is very soon, so i think you would have thought about speed and where to allow the motorized scooters and how to dock them. could you share some of the mta thoughts about that. >> sure. in terms of where they're allowed on the road, we have more limited authority, because that's generally covered under the california vehicle code, either under current law or pending election lation. they're not allowed on sidewalks, they are allowed in bike lanes, they aren't allowed on roads greater than 25 miles an hour, but that's not really subject to mta. we will be working on very detailed placement guidelines where you can and cannot place the scooters and operation plans that show

department and the historic preservation. san francisco public works for sidewalk modifications, office of small business will be doing outreach and education and providing resources to small businesses and your staff, the mayor's office on disability for their expertise on disability access standards. compliance is required, so for properties, for property owners who have places of public accommodation, they're required to comply with this law. and so, places of public accommodation examples are restaurants, bars, hair salons, nail salons, gyms, retail stories, grocery stores, daycare centers, et cetera. there are four exemptions to the properties entryways that are exempted from the law and one is buildings that are built on or after the year 2002, because those are deemed to have been built compliant. buildings owned and operated by religious organizations. bona find private club. and four, buildings without public accommodation. barriers to accessible entrances include one or more -- bariers to entryways can include one or more steps to the e

are there any other members of the public who'd like to speak in opposition of the appeal? seeing none, public comment is closed. [ gavel ]. >> president breed: and the appellant will have up to three minutes for rebuttal. >> first, i'd like to just say that there's a lot of miss informati -- misinformation being presented here today. first off, the planning commission has previously indicated that ellis act conversions would not cause eviction. the terms eviction and tenancy have legal means and they don't apply here because miss canada had a life estate, and she had a vested ownership in that life estate, which was revoekd ked the superior court. i will say the idea that she was unrepresented at court was absolutely ludicrous. she had no less than five, and i think somewhere closer to ten lawyers that took her case and subsequently, all but one draped that cadra dropped the case after getting the facts of the case. no affidavits from her family, no bills that were presented. in fact, we have presented an exhibit h where we have prove that her meals on wheels which was star