on item 48, supervisor weiner. supervisor weiner: that was interesting.leagues, our ballot measure system and votes in california and san francisco is broken. we have too many items on the ballot, too much complicated public policy decided with a yes or no vote, as we have seen with some of the measures passed on the ballot yesterday without an opportunity for the give-and- take of making public policy and public legislation. it is too easy to place things on the ballot whether by the board of supervisors or the mayor. we have too much ballot box budgeting. we have a ballot measure system that is far too easy to manipulate with money. of the various flaws that we need to fix in san francisco and on a bigger skill in california, this charter amendment addresses one of them. that flaw is that once a measure is passed, and we are talking about ordinance's here, policy statements, they are effectively frozen in time. no matter how much time passes, no matter how small or big a contemplated change, no matter how much consensus there is around a change, the onl

supervisor weiner: -- inequality. supervisor weiner: thank you very much. if there are any final speakers, please step forward now. >> my name is malcolm kaufman. i am on the board of directors of the cal hollow neighborhood association. there is little i can add to the eloquence of the 50 speakers to her and her today. i will add my voice to request to take all of san francisco beautiful, as it may be, into consideration, even though dpw talks about a specific site. we have to look at san francisco as a series of neighborhoods, as i am sure you will. we can live without at&t providing us their new system, whether it is comcast or someone else, and if they want to enter into the city they ought to do it with the idea that they are going to do it without contradicting what is best in this city. supervisor weiner: thank you very much. is there any further public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. let me just ask mr. allenbaugh

supervisor weiner: aye. supervisor avalos: no. supervisor campos: no. >> there are seven ayes and four nos. president chiu: this charter amendment is submitted. colleagues, why don't we now go back to the items related to at&t, which are items 5 through 7? madam clerk, please call those items. >> we have already called those items. president chiu: we had a little bit of a continuance earlier today because the department of public works was engaged in a conversation with at&t and four members of the board if there is someone from the dpw who could summarize your conversations? >> president and members of the board of supervisors, i am from the department of public works. the department has been reviewing the memorandum of understanding between at&t and public works related to additional commitments by at&t for the approval of a certain amount of facilities. at this point, we are happy with the proposed additional commitments from at&t. we will work to the best of our ability to make sure this is followed in every submittal. at&t fa

supervisor weiner: thank you. any other questions? were there any other departments that are present, other than dpw and planning? seeing none, we will go to public comments. chairperson mar: it sounds like because there are so many people we should limit this to two minutes per person. supervisor weiner: when you have 30 seconds left, you will hear a suffering of the bell. at 2 minutes, you will hear a loud one. if people could line up so we can go quickly from one to the other. richard lanceroti, [lists names] >> thank you, supervisor, for calling this important hearing. i am the president of walk san francisco. i was also on the better streets plan cac. first off, there was a comment that these boxes conform with the better streets plan. the buttressed its plan says that all sidewalks in san francisco in a residential neighborhood will be 10 feet wide as a minimum, with the recommendation of 12 to 13 feet. it also says that also a box in commercial areas shall be 12 feet wide at minimum, with recommendation of

weiner. >> package. >> weiner. >> package. >> weiner. weiner. weiner. weiner. >> package. >> weiner. weiner. weiner. >> package. >> package. >> jimmy: there you go. that's -- i've got a new ringtone. [ applause ] we haven't heard much from congressman weiner himself. we've seen a lot of him but we heard almost nothing. he's on a leave of absence from congress to get some kind of treatment, which -- i have to wonder what kind of a facility do you go to for whatever his problem is? >> do you use internet pornography, engage in online sex chats, tweet pictures of your naked body to strange women? well, help is here. as the pleasant valley home for the horny. our staff of caring and physically unappealing doctors and nurses offer a process guaranteed to dehornify. the most incurable of horn dogs. >> i used to be horny all the time. now i'm not. >> don't let chronic horniness let you enjoy your life. instead, beat it. head to the pleasant valley home for the horny. >> call today! >> jimmy: all right, so, there is a place. [ applause ] there's a place where he's gett

supervisor weiner: i want to be very clear. there are 2 b was separate issues, the ceqa issue and the permiting issue. they are completely separate and independent issues. regardless of what happens with ceqa, which can eventually get to it permitting process. the law is that dpw will issue a permit. i think it will be sent to a hearing officer and then appealed to the board of appeals for the ultimate say. but at&t has indicated, since at&t is the one that needs to apply for a particular site, that at&t as a matter of respect would defer to supervisors in terms of selecting are not selecting a site. i believe that at&t does have a particular letter of intent or mou, would everyone to call it. with individual supervisors, it would memorialize that in writing. supervisor mirkarimi: what piques my interest is if we reflect on the normal course of action that with an exemption does not require eir, when it occurs for one location, typically it is a ceqa response for all locations. i highly doubt that through any ceqa process there

commissioner weiner. commissioner weiner: thank you. first of all, i want to thank tsa staff for this study. this was requested by my predecessor, supervisor dufty. although corporate shuttles are in various parts of the city, there isn't a significant presence of corporate shuttles in district 8, particularly in noe valley, parts of the castro. these corporate shuttles, in my personal in view, provided a critical service to our city and many residents of our city, in terms of allowing people to live here who may not otherwise do so if they were required to commute by car every day, and by getting a lot of people out of their cars, providing significant transportation service to the city that we do not have to pay for. it provides significant benefit to the environment. of course, it is appropriate for us to make sure that we are working closely with these corporate shuttles, making sure they are being respectful of our streets, neighborhoods, and i applaud the ta for undertaking this study so we can move to a system where the shuttles

supervisor weiner: thank you. we often bragged in san francisco about our 77% diversion rate and how we are the envy of the country, and we really are. we have done a tremendous job as a city in terms of encouraging waste reduction. there are a number of reasons for that success. one of them is recology. throughout this process, i do not recall hearing any actual criticism of recology's service. even folks who are not supporting this today i have heard make positive comments about the service recology provides, a system tailored to the needs of san francisco. if this were a situation where we had a shoddy provider, that would be a different scenario. but i think everybody agrees to provide excellent service. i have heard an argument that we should somehow delayed this because there is the possibility of a ballot measure next june to repeal the 1932 ordinance. the 1932 ordinance has been around for a long time. this whole process, culminating in today, has been around for a long time. if people want to repeal the 1

supervisor weiner: i will be supporting the motion. this is my first rules committee meeting as a temporary member. it never ceases to blow my mind how qualified an applicant pool we get for every single kind of position that we have. we have one who went from the yale school of nursing and one who has a master's in social work and is a former marine. i am glad you will be able to serve on the one of these bodies. i would ask whether there are any lgbt members of this task force. chairperson kim: i believe mr. moramino has the answer to that. supervisor weiner: i ask that only because i know there is a significant lgbt population and hiv-positive population in the sro's. >> the other tenant representative is a member of the lgbt committee. chairperson kim: thank you. we have a motion to move forward mr. victor nelson on the sro taskforce with recommendation to the full board, without objection. thank you, and thank you to the members of the public who came out on this issue. i want to thank our friendly audience today. madam clark, ple

but i am with supervisor weiner at this point. supervisor elsbernd: over the last few years, i think i have fallen into the camp of folks who has become increasingly frustrated with the entertainment commission not necessarily being as responsive to all the various interests, and frankly i remember when president chu introduce legislation strengthening the entertainment commission. i was tempted to vote against it and offer amendments to spending the entertainment commission, because i thought the completely failed in the charter the were mandated to achieve. that said, we are moving forward and seeing what we can do. mr. meko, you almost got me in your presentation when you said you had been described as cranky. i am pretty sure they have described me in the same manner. [laughter] that just about got my vote. almost. that said, i think some new blood would be very helpful in that commission. and so you come down to the two other qualified candidates. let me say first to ms. sweet -- you are someone who needs to serve on the comm

commissioner weiner: ditto. [laughter] >> related to your question, the short answer is, there is not yet an enforcement plan attached to that item. further comment on that is we have made the point a couple of times, that it is important to have an enforcement plan before and after to understand how we are expending funds on this. this will have a real impact. enforcement has been the weak link, so to speak, in the process, for many years, installing signs. whether it is stop signs, speed signs, if driver do not respect them, and foresman does not happen, and then they are ineffective -- and does not enforcement does not happen, and then they are ineffective. mta might be here. i believe day may want to make a comment and provide details of what their findings are. >> good morning commissioners. sfmta sustainable streets division. regarding street signs, we want to move ahead with the implementation and procurement of funds. as part of the mayor's directive, as part of the pedestrian safety task force, there is

otherwise -- commissioner weiner. commissioner weiner: i just want to reiterate that i have been assured that corporate providers will be intimately included in this and this will be a collaborative process. my office will be deeply involved as well. also, i know that several other companies have been involved in the process but i have only seen google coming to these meetings. at least in my experience, in my district, apple has significantly more of a shuttle presence. there are probably at least double the number of apple buses in the district than there are google buses. i do not know what the explanation is. i just want to make sure that apple is a significant part of the discussions, and that they start coming to things as well. >> i have been in touch with apple, so i will reiterate that to them. in this pilot period, i would to see in the report, and deadline date for the pilot so it is not continuing on. fixed amount to pilot, then look of the results, then come back. commissioner mirkarimi: thank you. any ot

commissioner weiner: ditto. [laughter] >> related to your question, the short answer is, there is not yet an enforcement plan attached to that item. further comment on that is we have made the point a couple of times, that it is important to have an enforcement plan before and after to understand how we are expending funds on this. this will have a real impact. enforcement has been the weak link, so to speak, in the process, for many years, installing signs.

supervisor elsbernd: differ -- item four, supervisor weiner's proposal. >> i thought i watched this on tv earlier this morning. i was not aware he would be switching things around. i am asking you not to put this charter amendment forward. and think there are ways established to deal with changing these things, and i hope, maybe perhaps this will focus people's attention on us and a specific way to review a voter past initiatives and to see if there's a need for review and to bring them back to the voter. i think this is not a good policy. it is basically not a democratic way of handling the situation. we have really excellent alternatives. thank you very much. >> judy berkowitz. passed a resolution urging you not to pass this on to the full board in any form, including the latest amendment. however, i do congratulate supervisor weiner for accomplishing what heretofore only the planning department has been able to accomplish, and that is to unify many different sectors of the public behind something that does not serve the public well. the voters will. -- the voters well. i appeal for