supervisor wiener: what was the number? >> i don't have the number and fronter -- in front of me. >> all of the street lights that are non historic will be replaced. supervisor wiener: thank you. >> with that, are there any questions? >supervisor wiener: in terms of the level of deferred maintenance, i have heard the #$40 million. i'm curious to know if that's accurate. >> i don't have that information. >> that is something we could get back to you on. supervisor wiener: i'm sure it is a fair amount of deferred maintenance. >> i'm sure it's a significant number. supervisor wiener: what is the plan to address deferred maintenance? >> we have gone through a little bit of a change and hopefully for the better. we've changed our street light maintenance and the folks who go out and make the actual repairs to the streetlight, we have moved it from my organization to the first responders. we are actively going out, especially with the folks at night, looking for the folks that are out in the known areas where we have known owners

supervisor wiener: thank you. colleagues, any further questions? supervisor chu: one final one. is the puc coming forward with standards that you're going to be using it moving forward? >> yes, we are. we're putting together a catalog. thank you for prompting me to talk about something i forgot about. we have had public outreach for the last year or so to develop a catalog to sort of corral the options out there so we could have a more reasonably maintain a bowl inventory and look on the streets. we will be coming to the commission with recommendations on the catalog. thank you. supervisor wiener: thank you. next, i would like to invite up the representative from 311 to talk about the process from the 311 perspective. first of all, i want to compliment you on having dramatically simplified our city services. i remember when my predecessor supervisor dufty had 15 different numbers to call for different things. it has been a real success from my perspective. >> thank you. i am nancy o'hara, director of the 311 cente

supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: thank you. i just want to clarify one thing. the cleaning crew positions -- those are not funded, so those are being eliminated. >> so, the agreement is for four labor positions. supervisor wiener: and so, i am very interested in picking up dpw staffing around cleaning crews for the city, as well as gardening and landscaping work. i think dpw is very under- resources in those areas. we have seen a hollowing out in recent years in those functions. i would love to have more. i just want to raise that point. this is more a technical adjustment and would not in any way -- it is not really an ad back, but doing whatever we can to increase those positions so we have even more cleaning capacity. supervisor chu: thank you. mr. rose, any comments? >> no, madam chair. supervisor chu: ok, colleagues, can we take a motion for dpw. without objection. to ethics commission. >> good afternoon, supervisors. the commission agrees with the revised recommendations from the budget analyst. supervisor chu: any commen

supervisor wiener: let's move it to july 10. supervisor chiu: supervisor wiener has amended his motion to continue out to july 10. i understand or moshin, -- your motion, supervisor olague. supervisor olague: i want to make sure the public has a place they can come and get input. if there is some discussion that takes place among us -- i want to make sure the public has the opportunity to speak to the issue. supervisor chiu: supervisor wiener has made a motion to continue this to july 10. it was seconded by supervisor campos and supervisor campos will support supervisor olague's moshin. is there a second of supervisor wiener's to continue? -- to refer this to land use and the second to that was supervisor avalos. supervisor wiener's moshin takes precedence. is there any further discussion? >> your motion is not to send it back to the planning commission. you're saying send it to land use. we have a past agenda -- packed agenda to the legislative season. it will be impossible to hear it before we take off for a legislative break

supervisor wiener: excuse me. currently, when all light has to be replaced, what is that -- let's say it's one of the tall streetlights. do you replace that with pedestrian-grade lighting? or with the inadequate former like? >> it would be the latter. at this point, what we are doing -- in that scenario, one light on a block is impacted. so we replace it in time. when we perform work on an entire block, that is when we are integrating pedestrian lighting into that system. in some cases, we don't have to do much to the street light circuits to allow for that individual lighting load on the circuit. in some circumstances, we have to improve not just the pedestrian lights, but also improve the capacity of these circuits. at that scenario causes us to that improvement. >supervisor wiener: i guess i can understand if you have a block with a number of lights on it and you do not want to have one that is completely different. if you are already out there doing what is probably expensive work, it might be worth considerin

supervisor wiener: thank you. just a couple of questions. maintenance on the puc-owned lights -- to the cost estimate? >> i don't. i can get back to you with that. it would be sizable. supervisor wiener: what if we were to go in and convert the entire system in san francisco to pedestrian-lighting for puc lighting and pg&e? it would be a larger number. is there any idea what that would be? >> i agree with you, it would be a large number. hundreds of millions is what i would guess. supervisor wiener: thank you. the adequacy of the lights that are cast from the lights. there are different kinds of light. the yellow lights and the white lights. >> yes. puc observes the lighting standards established by national street lighting standards. when we do our photometric analysis, our target for the amount of light hitting the street is an industry standard. i would agree with you there is quite a bit of variation in the quality of the light. some is whiter. some is yellower. as we go through our elie the conversion project

supervisor mar: supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: thank you. i think there will be less public comment on this one. this is legislation that will name an existing city outdoor stairway at waller street as adah's stairway in recognition of adah bakalinsky, the author of a famous book. this would commemorate the stairway and the commemoratives street plant ordinance. and the city would accept the plaque as a gift. this is an iconic book that has been enjoyed by visitors and residents alike for almost three decades, allowing people to explore our amazing urban environment and to discover staircase is that people who lived here for decades never knew even existed. this would be a fitting tribute to ms. bakalinsky, who believe is about to turn 89. and so this is a stairway that has never really been named. it will still technically be waller street in terms of addresses and the like, but we will rename it as adah's stairway. that is the measure. supervisor mar: thank you. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? seeing none, public

supervisor wiener: questions? supervisor mar: i know that the senator presented to the joint policy committee a few weeks ago, where he said he would withdraw his legislation, a 1149. i think that he held it in committee, which pretty much killed it. but 878 is still moving forward and there are still questions over the relocation of the empty building to san francisco. is that right? >> that measure is still in play. i forget the number of the top of my head, but that measure is alive and viable. he is pressing for the auditor general's report. the financing structure and the appropriateness of that investment. so, that is out there. 878, as i indicated, is alive. was in position when he gutted and amended it. 879 is formally dead by virtue of not having passed the june 1 deadline. which does not mean that i do not think he would at some point, but he would not have the parliamentary ability. i think he is not going to do that in an occasion other than what he has done with 878. >> any other questions or comments

supervisor wiener, this is your item. >> supervisor wiener: thank you mr. chairman -- thank you, mr. chairman. i called for this hearing several months ago. i called for it when something i had never seen before happened during will call introductions. 5 of my colleagues spontaneously co-sponsored it. that does not happen often. the reason it happened is this is an issue with significance for the residents of san francisco. perhaps more than any other concern, buy it, and i know my colleagues as well, hear from our constituents about the problems with our streetlights, about the slowness and lack of responsiveness in fixing broken, otherwise problematics street lights. and i hear about dark streets and sidewalks, whether it is related to a enough street lights or the street lights are malfunctioning or the street lights are so high up they are not providing good lighting. and i hear about the lack of safety that this causes in terms of our streets. we know that our street lights are not for the most part pedestrian-grade, instead come up focusing on cars. -

supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: thank you. with respect to the earthquake preparedness position, can i just ask is that a $60,000 saving over two years? if i am not mistaken? >> let me turn back to that. supervisor wiener: correct me if i'm wrong. i saw in the report, there was not enough detail provided about the program. can i just ask what the rationale is for the recommendation of manager 2 versus manager 4? >> supervisor wiener, we were given a description. the reason we recommended manager 2 was the scope of the program. they had not developed yet. they had not come up with any detail. it is a $400,000 budget. we did not see this a significant program to justify the higher level manager. since they are now saying they need someone with higher level technical skills, that is not information provided to was previously. supervisor wiener: would you have come to a different conclusion? >> i think it is new information. part of the reason for recommending the service is that we have no information on this program, so i think

supervisor wiener: exactly. right now you have to have 220 square feet of living area, apart from kitchen, bathroom, a closet, and this will reduce it to 150. these are the amendments i made last week, and is stipulates that when you include kitchen, bathroom, closet, it still has to be at 220 square feet. it is just the living area component is reduced. supervisor mar: it is for new construction. so king edward transitional age youth, which is the renovation of a hotel or bed and breakfast, is not included? >> the new destruction or if you were getting the interior of the building. it is when the building code gets into play -- or if you were gutting the interior of the building. right now, you would only be able to do the kind of project in an existing building, not if you're doing it from scratch. this provides more flexibility. supervisor mar: it really does seem like this increases flexibility for a developer to create more affordable units. it does not necessarily helping to create more family units, but s

ok, supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: thank you.anted to mention briefly that today, mayor lee is introducing the first element of the housing trust fund, a charter amendment that would begin creating that front, and i am proud to be cosponsoring that with the mayor along with several colleagues. this resulted from a lengthy an important process to address how we are going to ensure the continued production and the existence of affordable housing in this city for low-income people, but also for middle- income folks, and that means public funding of affordable housing and it also means having smart housing policies that actually trigger the creation of enough housing to make sure that housing does not continue to spiral out of control in terms of rent and home prices. the mayor oversaw an extensive and important process, and i particularly want to commend -- and there are a lot of people to commend who really played an instrumental role here. there will be other pieces moving forward. the funding aspect of it is partially resolve the

supervisor farrell: : supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: thank you. i respect supervisor campos' comments, but i respectfully disagree. what is before us today is already a compromise. i'm not saying everyone has agreed to it, but it has been reduced from what it was. it was originally put on the ballot, and i supported, that would repeal the right choice voting entirely. i supported it when it was on the ballot for many years and continued to support it. in the last several years, i have come to believe that it is not the best way to conduct an election, keeping in mind that every single system, including the system we have, the system we have now, the system that is being proposed, and other systems that have been presented, none is perfect. they all have upside and downside, but i think going back to the runoff system is the better way of assuring maximizing voter engagement and making sure there are clear things between candidates, and given the state of the press coverage of local elections and given the lack of information in terms of distinguis

supervisor wiener: right. but by pulling people off of other responsibilities, that could be taking them off the trial team, evaluating whichever department? >> that is correct. but that is what has been happening here for. i would also note that is discussed in our recommendations. it is an expansion. as you know, in the department budget, there is an increase in general fund costs of the next two years. in fact, over the two year period, there is an 80% general fund increase. supervisor wiener: from what to what? >> $6 million this year to $9 million. supervisor wiener: when you're talking about a small part of the department to budget -- >> wright. it is $6 million to $9 million. supervisor wiener: i'm just talking about the city attorney resources because the department provides critical resources, and so that is a zero sum game. >> that is why we did not put it on the ship and made it a policy decision, because it is an expansion of what they do, the way they presented it in that regard. we are presenting

supervisor chu: supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: thanks for the presentation. two questions. first with 6.5 million with parking and traffic, it has been a narrative that has developed in the press and elsewhere, that that department, that mta saw they had this labor shortage because of inaccurate assumptions about labor costs. to make up for that, proposing to increase parking enforcement. could you comment on that? for example, the increase in parking enforcement, was this already planned? if so, why was that revenue not in the original budget? this is a narrative, as you know better than i, has been developing out there. it is important to explain to the public how this proceeded. >> thank you. it is a fair and good question. we have been looking at our parking control for a while now. recently, as i mentioned, we made a management change in the area. we recently had the benefit of some resources from the comptroller's office to look at how we manage our parking control officers and enforcement unit. that has been getting us to the conclusions that we got to in this revise

supervisor elsbernd: i will turn it over to supervisor wiener. supervisor wiener: thank you, chairman, and thank you for accommodating the special meeting in giving us time to try to broker the peace so we could put the strongest parks bond possible on the ballot. this park spawned is critical to the future and almost $200 million in funding for mass of capital needs, playground, pools, rec centers, irrigation systems and irrigation to port open space. as with any bond, in needs two- thirds to pass the ballot. any organized opposition could be a threat to a bond. today i am offering an amendment to continue to build support for the bond relating to a very small aspect of the bond, almost exactly 2% of the funding in the bond, specifically around trail money. urban trails are absolute treasures. they need a ton of work. we have seen amazing work by the recreation and parks department as well as thousands of volunteers. in my district we seen the great work of billy goat hill, one of his deatbiemuena vista. my hat goes off to all of those volunteer

supervisor wiener: any questions? thank you very much. we will now open the floor to public comment. i have a free public comment cards. >> thank you for calling this hearing and i appreciate everyone for your presentation. i was frankly surprised to hear that in the fourth quarter of last year, the estimate of closing repairs was 2.6 days and a statement that pg&e is down to just seven days to make a repair. i think we are aware there was a terrible crime committed on fair oaks street. i'm with the fair oaks community coalition. on november 28, iphone 311 and reported a street light out. they said they sent a crew to see you owned it and when i called the next day, i was told it was a pg&e poll and it would be repaired as soon as possible. 10 days later, the repair had still not been made and a vicious sexual assault was perpetrated by a man who grabbed a woman across 24th street under bright streetlights and then dragged her across the intersection to the darkness under that burned out light to attack her. when i called the next day to

i want to thank supervisor wiener for his ability to find this committee. at the last week's meeting, recreation and parks said the trial restoration money, that there was priorities determined in the 2008 bond for which trails would get money from the trail restoration projects, and that they would use the same priorities this time with the 2012 bond as they did in 2008. of course the 2008 bond was only four trails and natural areas, so that was a bit of a red flag for those of us that are concerned about the with the natural areas program has been using trial restoration money for things other than making them safer. i am very much happy to see this line which has been added. without this, we would have had the same language in 2008, and that would of been a concern to a lot of people. with the new language added, mclaren clearly needs work, in golden gate also. those are two of the major gems in the city. the forest alliance is satisfied with the additional language. we might have hoped for more, but that is the nature of it, and we are satisfied and wil