Transcripts For SFGTV BOS Full Board Of Supervisors 20240712

Clerk mr. President , you have a quorum. President yee all right. Thank you. Please place your right hand over your heart, and would you please join me in the pledge of allegiance. [pledge of allegiance] president yee thank you. On behalf of the board, i would like to acknowledge the staff of sfgtv, who record each of the meetings and make the transcripts available to the public online. Madam clerk, are there any communications . Clerk yes, mr. President. The minutes will reflect that during the covid19 pandemic, the members of the board participated remotely Via Video Conference to the same extent as though physically present in their meeting chamber. The city believes that it is essential all communities with and without internet have the ability to participate remotely in this meeting. Your written correspondence on any item will be made a part of the official file. Address any mail to San Francisco city hall, 944 carlton e. Goodlett place, San Francisco, california, 94102. If using your computer, you can access the live extreme by going to sfgtv. Org. If you are watching on cable channel 26, please note there is a delay. If youre calling in, telephone number should be crawling across your television or computer. Its 14156550001, and when you hear the prompt, entering the meeting i. D. 1464274376, press pound, and pound again, and turn down your t. V. , otherwise, youll miss the prompts. Will the interpreters introduce themselves in session, in language to let them know youre here to assist speakers with Public Comment. [speaking spanish language] [end of translation. Interpreter thank you, madam clerk. [speaking tagalog language] [end of translation] interpreter thank you. [speaking cantonese language] [end of translation] interpreter thank you. Clerk thank you all for your great assistance. Just a quick word of on what the public is able to provide testimony on. There are two agenda items that are slated to begin consecutively at 3 00 p. M. , each with its own public hearing that the president will call individually. For 26, thats the determination of Community Plan evaluation at 23 harrison street, and the proposed project at 617 sanchez street. For those that wish to provide Public Comment, that is item 39. During Public Comment, you may speak on items of subject matter jurisdiction that are not on the agenda, the minutes, items 43 through 47 on the Committee Reference calendar, and i want to point out item 47, whether or not to convene the closed session on the labor negotiations, and for those interested in the question of whether or not the board of supervisors should convene in closed session to discuss existing litigation in authorizing settlement of the lawsuit filed by Hastings School of the school. Public comment will be permitted, but limited to whether or not to convene in closed session, and not on the actual terms of the settlement. All other items 1 through 25 and 34 through 37 have each had a duly noticed public hearing fulfilled at committee and are not eligible for additional Public Comment today. Two last points. If you have any access or connection issues, please contact my office at 4155545184. We have someone standing by to assist you, and mr. President , pursuant to title 2 of the americans with disabilities act, through a prior arrangement, we have an individual who has requested to make his Public Comment by telephone, and we are able to provide him that when you determine ready. Thank you. President yee thank you, madam clerk. So before we get started, just a friendly reminder for all the supervisors to mute your microphones when you are not speaking to avoid audio feedback. Colleagues, today, we are approving the minutes from the july 14, 2020 regular Board Meeting and the july 8, 2020 budget and Appropriations Committee meeting which constituted a quorum of the board of supervisors. Are there any changes to these Meeting Minutes . Seeing none, can i have a motion to approve the minutes at presented . Supervisor peskin so moved. President yee moved by supervisor peskin, seconded by supervisor mandelman mandelman. President yee seconded by mandelman. Madam clerk, will you please call the roll. Clerk on the approval of the minutes [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee okay. Then without objection, the minutes will be approved, after Public Comment, as presented. Madam clerk, would you please go ahead and invite the the individual who needed accommodation for Public Comments . Clerk yes, mr. President. Before i do, i want to just indicate to the individual, please let us know in advance when you want this accommodation, sir. We will only grant it if we know in advance before the meeting begins that this is something that youre interested in doing. Happy to provide it, though. Operations, please let the caller make his statement. Hi. My name is zach karnazes. Can you all hear me . Clerk yes, we can. Thank you. My name is zach karnazes. Im a wheelchair user and disability advocate here in San Francisco. I would like to explain a little more of what happened in this situation because i think it has everything to do with the a. D. A. Coordinator with the board of supervisors. Before i go into that, i just want to say i support a settlement around the u. C. Hastings lawsuit. Its very much a Community Issue that should not be decided in closed session. So the reason why this accommodation was to so tricky was i informed mr. Wilson, the a. D. A. Coordinator, that i had been calling in every week for this accommodation. I asked him if it could be a rolling accommodation because its very difficult for me to use a computer. Mr. Wilson denied that request. He has previously demanded that i prove my disability, which i offered to do, and did not follow up with me on that. In an email quote, he said, i do not have to answer your interrogatories. And then, when i called in two weeks ago, he said this board was on vacation, and i asked him if he could let me know when that was happening so when i make the request and call in, im not wasting my time. He said he would not do that, he refused to do that. And then, when i called in today, he did not want to pass me through on the line. Every time i talk to mr. Wilson, he seems to have a seething animosity towards the disabled. Angela calvillo has been very helpful, and the rest of her staff has not been this way. Thank you for your time. President yee okay. All right. Madam clerk, lets go to our consent agenda. Please call items 1 through 12 together. Clerk items 1 through 12 are on consent. These items are considered routine. If a member objects, an item may be removed and considered separately. President yee colleagues, would anyone like to sever any of these items . Seeing none, no names on the roster, madam clerk, please call the roll on items 1 through 12. Clerk on items 1 through 12 [roll call] supervisor peskin i would like to make a motion to rescind the vote. Supervisor mandelman second. Clerk generally, that motion would have to be made before the roll call has been taken. Supervisor peskin and madam clerk, for procedurals sake, and my apologies, colleagues, we can finish it, and then, i can make the motion to rescind the vote on one of the 12 items, so i vote aye. Clerk okay. [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee okay. So without objection, then, the ordinance passes unanimously. Madam clerk, i forgot to mention that supervisor safai will be joining us at a later point during the meeting, just to let people know. Supervisor peskin . Supervisor peskin thank you, president yee. My apologies, colleagues, for not hitting the buzzer sooner. I would like to make a motion to rescind the vote on item number 11. Supervisor mandelman second. President yee is there a second . Second by supervisor mandelman. Supervisor mandelman yes. President yee roll call, please. Clerk on the motion to rescind the vote on item 11 [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee okay. The motion to rescind passes. Supervisor peskin thank you, president yee, and i should have hit the buzzer sooner on the legislation that we have nicknamed c. U. Sooner, as in conditional use sooner. I want to thank my cosponsors fewer, walton, haney, mandelman, and or ronen, fewer, haney, walton, yee, and safai. I would like to make a motion to duplicate this file and send that duplicative file back to committee, and maybe something comes of those conversations, and maybe not, but id like to provide a space to do that, so i here by make a motion to duplicate the file, send the duplicated file back to committee, and then would urge your vote yet again on item number 11. Thank you, colleagues. President yee okay. Is there a motion to duplicate the file . Supervisor mandelman second. President yee okay. So theres a motion to duplicate and a second. Madam clerk . Clerk okay. There are two things. Before i call the roll, ill read the item. Item 11 is an ordinance amending the planning code to expedite the conditional use authorization review and approval process and reduce the application for certain uses of commercial space and affirming the determination under the ceqa determination and making the appropriate findings. And then, on the motion to duplicate the file [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee okay. Then the motion to duplicate the file and send it to committee passes. Madam clerk, on the item itself. Clerk on item 11 [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee okay. So this ordinance passes, finally. Madam clerk, will you call item number 12 . [inaudible]. Clerk 13 and 14 . President yee 13 and 14, right. Clerk items 13 and 14 called together are two ordinances that amend the planning code. Item 13 amends the planning code to require that educator housing projects at least 10 residential units have three or more bedrooms, and item 14 is an ordinance amending the planning code to allow extra height, exceeding otherwise politicable height limitations, for making applicable height limitations, for making the appropriate findings under ceqa. President yee okay. Madam clerk, will you call the roll. Clerk on items 13 and 14 [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee okay. Without objection, the ordinance are finally passed unanimously. Madam clerk, lets call items 15 through 17. Clerk items 15 through 17 together are three ordinances that compromise the balboa reservoir project items. Item 15 is the ordinance to amend the general plan to revise the balboa park station area plan, the recreation and open space element, and the land use index, to amend the Housing Element in regard to the design of housing for families with children. Item 16 amends the planning code and zoning map to create the balboa reservoir special use district and rezone the balboa rememberer voyeur west basin project site, and item 17 is an ordinance approval a Development Agreement between the city and county of San Francisco and reservoir communaute metropolitaine de montreal partners, llc. , for the balboa reservoir proje a Reservoir Community partners, and to make the appropriate findings. President yee okay. Madam clerk, go ahead and call the roll on these items. Clerk on items 15 through 17 [roll call] president yee okay. Without objection, the ordinances are finally passed unanimously. Madam clerk, lets go to new busine business, and please call the next item. Clerk item 18 is a resolution approving the c. A. R. E. S. Act Emergency Solutions grants coronavirus program, authorizing the mayor, on behalf of the city and county of San Francisco, to apply for, accept, and expend the citys c. A. R. E. S. Act e. S. G. Program round 2 entitlement from the u. S. Department of housing and urban development, in the amount of a43. 6 million and amending the e. S. G. Program round 1 entitlement expenditure plan in the amount of 3. 25 million. President yee okay. Madam clerk, there are no names on the roster, so please call the roll. Clerk on item 18 [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee okay. Without objection, the resolution is adopted unanimously. Madam clerk, lets go to item 19. Clerk item 19 is an ordinance amending the planning code to reenact a provision permitting nonretail professional services above the first story in Chinatown Community Business District zoning control table, which was inadvertently deleted in recently enacted legislation, affirming the Planning Departments determination, and making the appropriate findings. President yee okay. Madam clerk, please call the roll. Clerk on item 19 [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee without objection, this item is passed unanimously. Before we go to the next item, supervisor peskin . Supervisor peskin yes, mr. President . President yee were you going to make any amendments on item 19 . Supervisor peskin not to my knowledge. President yee okay. Have you determined that you were just supposed to rescind the vote . Supervisor peskin i am this was a technical correction relative to nonretail uses, and when the article 8 changes were brought forward by the department of city planning, this was a technical omission that planning asked that we fix for nonretail professional services above the ground floor. I am not aware of any changes, but i will search my emails right now, and if there are any changes, i will make a motion later in the meeting to rescind accordingly. President yee okay. Supervisor walton . Supervisor walton thank you so much, president yee. I just wanted to speak when we got to item 20, if thats where we are. President yee okay. Well be there in a sec. Madam clerk, lets go to item 20 now. Clerk okay. Item 20 is a resolution to support a reparations plan that will comprehensively address the inequities that exist in the African American community as a result of slaverys legacy of systemic oppression and creating an Advisory Committee for the African American community. President yee supervisor walton . Supervisor walton thank you, president yee. I just want to thank all of my colleagues for their support in this resolution. Its great to see them fighting systemic racism going forward, and i just wanted to thank all of my colleagues. President yee okay. Madam clerk, go ahead and call the roll. Clerk on item 20 [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee okay. Without objection, the item is adopted unanimously. Madam clerk, please call the next item. Clerk item 21 is a motion approving the mayors nomination for the appointment of jane natoli to the Municipal Transportation Agency board of directors, term ending march 1, 2024. President yee supervisor mar. I think youre on mute. Supervisor mar thank you, president yee. I want to start by thanking miss natoli for her willingness to serve in this roll. I supported her, speaking in support of her nomination, and i understand that support and understand miss natolis work, especially her advocacy in the bike coalition. Since that time, ive heard many people speak out in opposition to her nomination, including the tenderloin, Richmond District rising, and latina democratic club, and they joined earlier opposition from the harvey milk lgbtq democratic club, somcan, united to save the mission, and the s. F. Taxi Workers Alliance and Mission Neighborhood centers. And i cant ignore the comments read in this opposition. Most of those are grassroots volunteer organizations that represent marginalized communities, including and especially lowincome residents, seniors, and people are disabilities and people of color, and these are the communities that are most dependent on Public Transportation and whose needs should be centered on by the m. T. A. And the sfmta board of directors. These voices have been ignored and marginalized time and time again, and we should not and cannot ignore them today. As we all know, sfmta is facing a deeply uncertain future, with Transit Service cut to the bone, a monumental budget crisis. Meanwhile, were making bold, meaningful progress on making our city more walkable. In my district, weve created the great highway to an outdoor market during the shelter in place and have moved forward with an aggressive comprehensive plan to daylighting our neighborhood. I welcome miss natolis partnership on this, but yabeyd this, we need a nominee with a depth of experience on transit advocacy and equity, where oversight is desperately needed. We need to listen to these communities when they tell us what they need, and in the face of the outpouring of opposition from equity folks groups, from transit groups, from Chinese Community organizations, i need to listen to them, and more. So with Great Respect to miss natoli, and her work on many issues, i cannot support this item here today. President yee supervisor fewer . Supervisor fewer yes. Thank you, president yee. I want to associate myself with the comments from supervisor mar. I have spoken with the communities that have come out and spoken out, and i want to thank miss natoli for her willingness to serve, and also the time that she took to speak with me. I also will not be able to support this appointment today. Thank you. President yee okay. Madam clerk, roll call, please. Supervisor peskin oh, hold on, mr. President. I see supervisor stefani. I will speak after her. Supervisor stefani colleagues, i was pleased to support miss natolis nomination last week, and i do want to start by recognizing the importance of the decision that we are all faced with. As weve all heard, clearly and consistently from our constituents and director tumlin, the sfmta is in dire straits at the moment. Miss natoli will bring that leadership to the sfmta board of directors. I just want to say that although jan and i have certainly had our policy disagreements in the past, i do appreciate the passion that she brings in her advocacy week, and when april and i met with her, we met to discuss her no, maam nati maam nomination, and i have to admit i was approaching this from a place of scepticism because of the comments made about me, but this was not about me. This was about miss natoli, and not about the comments made about me, thank god. Just really more so with Community Outreach, rather than huge disagreements, and we discussed that. Ive gotten to know her better, and i appreciate all her efforts for her activism. Its something we appreciate in San Francisco. I know that those strong activists do go onto make great commissioners, directors, supervisors, and sometimes may mayors. In our discussions, she highlighted many topics that garnered a lot of passion from me. [inaudible] like put bikes in a certain situation, when all we really want them to do is work with our constituents. So we had a long discussion about that. We also want to make sure that Transportation System is safe, effective, and comfortable for all san franciscans, regardless of how people travel. So while there may be issues where well come down on different sides in the future, which i think is the case for all of us, im certain that miss natoli will be a forceful voice for the lgbtq and all communities on the sfmta board of directors. I am pleased to support her nomination today, and i thank you for listening. President yee supervisor peskin . Supervisor peskin thank you, president yee, and thank you to the three previous members that spoke, and i have to concur with supervisors mar and fewer and unfortunately cannot support ms. Natolis confirmation to the m. T. A. Board, and i do not take that reservation lightly. In now my 13th year over the last 20 years as a member of the board of supervisors, ive never taken these decisions lightly. It is very rare that we have commissions where the board, by a majority vote, has to confirm the mayors nominee, but in this particular instance, i want to remind us of the larger political context where, really, the only check and balance that this elected body has over a mayoral nominee is this appointment process. To the only other body that, together with this elected legislative body, has legislative authority really on par with the board of supervisors relative to transportation and certain development issues. And in light of the m. T. A. S ability to make and pass laws that affect millions of people who ride our Public Transportation system every week, that number actually peaked at the dawn of the century, by some estimates, upwards of 1. 8 Million People who ride Public Transportation per week, the current pandemic notwithstanding, and accountability is key. As everybody knows, and im sometimes blamed for or lauded for, i was intimately involved in crafting proposition a in 2007 that built off of thensupervisors ammiano and newsoms prop e of 1999, which essenti essentially reformed the m. T. A. Board of directors into a parallel branch in our government, which really, i think, gives us a heightened responsibility to the transitdependent communities that we serve and this commission serves. And i still struggle with my role in proposition a, which was the last vestige of this legislative oversight which has, in essence, become a legislative branch body. And in recent years, ive been a part of a number of efforts to do charter reform around the m. T. A. I joined supervisor yees proposition l in 2006 to split the Appointment Authority with three from the board and four from the mayor. And for the record, i dont think that measure failed on its merits but because it was lumped in with three other bold attempts at balancing legislative and executive functions in our government that was opposed by millions of dollars of downtown money. And i bet you anything, if prop l was on the ballot today, it would pass with overwhelming support of the electorate. And i acted with president yee to enact certain decisions that thankfully have not been used, and you can readout there on the agenda what is appealable to the board of supervisors. Most recently, i worked with supervisor preston on a amendment that was only withdrawn when our mayor and director tumlin voted to disprove fare increases, which miss natoli was a flag waving supporter of. While director tumlin has no direct influence over the laws that separate the m. T. A. From the board of supervisors, i think theyve got to some length, if not great lengths, to work with all of us to really turn a page and create a new spirit of collaboration between these two legislative bodies. And it is in that context that i see this appointment. I think supervisor stefani referenced some of that friction, and i dont think its a good fit. But at the end of the day, i throw down with the transit dependent communities that we all represent, and in my case, that is the chinese American Community in chinatown, and i will invoke the same communications that supervisor mar invoked from you name it, you somcan, united save the mission, chinatown trip, the rose pak democratic club, and i think supervisor mar referenced many more, including the harvey milk democratic club, and richmond rising. I will say ive done my homework on this. Ive spoken with supporters as well as opponents. Ive spoken with transportation advocates who fundamentally see the world in a much more complicated way than just a certain mode of or certain modes of transportation for more affluent communities, and i also spoke with ms. Natoli on the phone last evening for nearly a half an hour. And i have to say candidly, unfortunately, that after that lengthy conversation, i left feeling no more comfortable with miss natolis understanding of transportationdependent communities and being on this body, that being the sfmta. For those reasons i could go on longer, but i will leave it at that i will vote in the negative. Thank you, mr. President and colleagues. President yee supervisor ronen . Supervisor ronen yes. Thanks, colleagues. Ive been struggling tremendously with this appointment and came into the Board Meeting today in one of those rare votes not knowing exactly what i was going to do, and i was looking forward to hearing from my colleagues about their opinions. At the at the board at the rules committee meeting, which i chair, none of the groups that had sent letters, with the exception of one individual whos a member of at least one of those groups, called in to express any of their concerns about miss natoli. So we did hear from a number of her supporters but were not able to hear from her opponents, and we werent able to hear her answers to these critiques, which is a shame, but it is what it is. When i first spoke to miss natoli a number of months back, i would agree with what supervisor peskin just said. I found her knowledge, her breadth of knowledge to be very, very narrow. And mostly, she had deep, deep knowledge about bicycles but not as much about the bus system and the Transit System that transit dependent communities rely so much upon. However, you know, three months after that conversation, at the rules committee, she was actually quite knowledgeable, and it was clear to me that she had taken the time her hearing took a long time to schedule due to all the ballot measures, that she had taken that time to study quite a lot and learn about the issues. And what was most important to me in that meeting is that she made a clear and unambiguous promise that she will not raise fares, which is if you remember, was the primary reason the board decided not to reappoint miss rubke to the sfmta commission. That was a big point, and i was very glad she was unambiguous of that. I continue to struggle because of my deep respect for all of these groups that have sent in these letters, and i im on the fence with this one, but i will stick to the vote that i made in the rules committee, but i would ask, miss natoli, if you are appointed, you have a lot of work to continue to do with these communities, and im going out on quite a limb here in supporting your nomination when many of these Community Groups that i work extremely closely with and that represent transit dependent riders in my district are opposing your nomination. So i would expect you to reach out and work, and work further to understand their perspective, to continue to dialogue with me and those communities if you are appointed today, and to take it as a serious thing that that so many of these incredible Community Groups decided to write in and oppose your nomination. So again, i this is one of those votes that im not sure what the right way to go is, but im going to support it. Thank you. President yee okay. Madam clerk, go ahead and i dont know if supervisor safai is clerk supervisor safai just joined us. President yee okay. So the nomination needs to have six votes clerk yes. President yee okay. Madam clerk, go ahead and call the roll. Clerk on item 21 [roll call] clerk there are four ayes and six noes, with supervisors mar, peskin, preston, walton, yee, and fewer in the dissent. President yee so the motion fails. [gave [gavel]. Supervisor peskin mr. President . President yee so lets go to supervisor peskin . Supervisor peskin you were right. I would like to make a motion to rescind item 19, and there are some small technical corrections that i thought are some small technical corrections that i thought could be made by the clerk, but they need to be made by the board of supervisors. So my second bad today; i would like to rescind the vote on item 19. President yee motion to rescind. Is there a second . Supervisor preston second. President yee seconded by supervisor preston, i think. Roll call, please. Clerk on the motion to rescind item 19 [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee motion to rescind passes. Supervisor peskin, would you like to amend the supervisor peskin thank you, president yee. I would like to make a motion to replace the file number on page 1, at line 21 from file 200114 to 200771. At line 23, to scratch out the two blanks and insert so the sentence reads, the board of supervisors hereby finds that the actions contemplated in this ordinance are consistent with the citys general plan and have no effect on policies in planning code section 1. 001 and insert in that this ordinance corrects an error in the chinatown business rezoning table, and section 101. 9 findings for the chinatown ordinance. Strike the next sentence, and it would then say a copy of resolution number fill in the blank 20049 is on file with the clerk of the board, and 200194 on subsection c, at line 10, insert reasons set forth in subsection b above and strike the rest of that sentence. These are only findings and do not change the substance of the ordinance set forth in section 810 in the table 810, and that is my motion, mr. President. President yee okay. Thisll be a motion made to amend as outlined by supervisor peskin. Is there a second . Supervisor ronen second. President yee madam clerk, on t roll call on the motion to amend. Clerk on the motion to amend [roll call] clerk there are ten ayes. President yee okay. So the motion to amend passes. [gavel]. Supervisor peskin and mr. President , i am not sure if, when you spoke to the fact that supervisor safai was going to attend late, whether or not we excused him. If we have not, i would like to make a motion to excuse supervisor safai. [please stand by] clerk [roll call] there are 10 ayes. President yee and the motion passes. Supervisor peskin . Supervisor peskin im ready to vote on the item as amended, sir. President yee got it. Madam clerk, go ahead. Clerk on item 19 as amended. [roll call] there are 10 ayes. President yee okay. So item as amended passes. Madam clerk, just continue on to item 22 and 23. Clerk okay. Item 22, is a motion to approve the mayoral nomination for the reappointment of Eduardo Santacana to the board of appeals for a fouryear term. And item number 23, to approve the mayoral nomination for the appointment of richard swig to the board of appeal for a fouryear term ending july 1, 2024. President yee okay, madam clerk, take the roll on these items. Clerk on items 22 and 23. [roll call] there are 10 ayes. President yee okay. Without objection the motion is approved unanimously. Madam clerk, to the next item. Clerk item 24, a motion to approve the president of the board of supervisors, norman yees nomination, for the appointment of darryl honda to the board of appeals for a fouryear term ending july 1, 2024. President yee okay. I just quickly want to thank commissioner honda for being willing to serve again. It takes a lot of dedication and i hope that i can count on your support to appoint him to this new seat on the board of appeals. So, madam clerk, roll call, please. Clerk on item number 24. [roll call] there are 10 ayes. President yee okay, then, without objection, the motion is approved unanimously. Madam clerk, go to the next item. Clerk item 25 is a motion to approve the mayors nomination for the appointment of sharon lai to the Municipal Transportation Agency board of directors, term ending march 1, 2021. President yee supervisor peskin. Supervisor peskin thank you, president yee, and thank you for having me cochair with director tumlin. And ive had the opportunity to work in that capacity with miss lai who was appointed as a Community Representative to the recovery group. And i have to say that she has been highly engaged, asked very good questions of the leadership. And has been instrumental in helping guide this process, including constantly raising issues around equity, access and affordability, and, colleagues, as you have seen some of the previously mentioned most established grassroots organizations in the district that i represent that represent transit dependent constituents, including chinatown trip, and the rose pack democratic club, have long advocated for appropriate representation from this community and they are all in support of miss lai and i want to thank miss lai for reaching out to these transportation equity organizations and ultimately securing their support. And i will vote in the affirmative and encourage all of you to do the same. President yee supervisor fewer. Supervisor fewer thank you, president yee. I want to also say that im in full support of miss lai and i thank her for stepping up and taking this responsibility to serve the people of San Francisco. And i want to take this moment to say that i am glad that theres a chinese speaker on this board, the m. T. A. Board, to actually speak and to represent the chinese voice and the ridership of muni of those who are chinesespeaking people. I feel they have not had a voice, and i am sure and positive that miss lai will be that voice for them. And i want to in advance say thank you for that. President yee just real quickly, i never had any doubt that miss lai had an equity lens. She i have spoken to her about other issues and shes constantly bringing that up. The only issue that i was a little apprehensive about was whether she had the time to do this. Basically all of the things that she does. But i think that her serving on the Recovery Task force has proven that shes just got more energy than i could imagine and i will be supporting her nomination today. Anybody else . So, madam clerk, go ahead and call the roll. Clerk on item number 25. [roll call] there are 10 ayes. President yee okay, without objection, the motion is approved unanimously. All right, that brings us to our real 3 00 p. M. Special order. Madam clerk, call items 26 through 29 together. Commissioner yekutiel okay. Item 26 through 29 compromise the appeal of determination of Community Plan evaluation for 2300 harrison street. And item 26 is the public hearing for persons interested in the Community Plan evaluation by the Planning Department under the California Environmental quality act or ceqas are, for the project at 2300 harrison street approved on february 19, 2020, to allow the demolition of an existing surface parking lot and construction of a sixstory garage and vertical addition to an existing threestory Office Building resulting in a mixed use building with 29 dwelling units of office space and ground retail, and 38 additional bicycle and car parking spaces. And item 27 to affirm the Planning Departments determination that the proposed project is exempt from further Environmental Review. Item 28, is the motion to conditionally reverse that determination, subject to the adoption of written findings. And item 29 is the motion to direct the preparation of findings. President yee okay. Colleagues, we have before us an appeal for the proposed project at 2300 harrison street in district 9. This appeal is related to the Planning Department Community Plan evaluation under the California Environmental quality act. After the hearing, the board will vote on the Community Plan evaluation. Without objection, we will proceed as follows. Up to 10 minutes for the presentation by the appellant, or their representative. And two minutes per speaker in support of the appeal. Up to 10 minutes for presentation from the city departments. Then up to 10 minutes for the project sponsor or their representatives to present. And then two minutes per speaker in opposition to the appeal and in support of the project. And, finally, up to three minutes for rebuttal by the appellant or their representatives. Colleagues, any objections to moving forward this way . Okay. Seeing no objection, the public hearing will pursue as indicated and now open. Supervisor roanen, would you like to make any comments . Supervisor ronen no, ill have questions after the presentations. President yee okay. Seeing no one else on the roster, i will now ask the appellant to come forward and to present their case. You have up to 10 minutes. Are you there . Yes, yes, i am. President yee all right. Its all yours. All right. Thank you so much, president yee, supervisors, for hearing this appeal today. I just want to make sure that if the screen is being shared right now for the presentation . President yee yes. Okay. All right, thank you, board of supervisors. I am a mission resident that has been living here for last two years and working here for more than five. I come to you today to appeal a project at 2300 harrison. Its first important to note that our city is facing an Unprecedented Health crisis and one that has disproportionately affected latinos and people within the black community as well. And i think that its more important than ever that we ask ourselves what have we been doing to address the inequities in our laws and our policies and institutions that result in inequitable treatment and opportunity, particularly at a time when these people are suffering even more as a result of this health crisis. On june 11, 2020, the Planning Commission was brave enough to come out with a resolution acknowledging and apologizing for their history of inequitable planning policies and theres been a history of inequitable policies that have resulted in disparities for communities of color. We started speaking about this truth. My question to all of you today is, do we have the courage to act upon it . 2300 harrison is an inconsistent project that is harmful to the communities of color. Before we go into it, first, 23 2300 harrison has been exploiting a law that is intended to increase housing and by leveraging the tiny amount of housing theyre able to get what turns into a biggest profit in this city, which is office space. They exploited concessions and waivers offered through the state law to combine the proposed building on the second and third floor, which both contain offices, with the existing building that is there. And that existing building has 68,000squarefeet of office, so this combines into nearly 100,000squarefeet of connected office. On april 30, 2019, the Planning Department determined that the application did not require further Environmental Review under section 1583 of the ceqa guidelines, asserting that the project was consistent with the general plan and the Mission Area Plan. And ceqa 15183 is a streamlined review process that should only be given to projects that are consistent with the general plan and Mission Area Plan. Planning determination to permit streamlined review under ceqa guidelines 1583 are incorrect. We demand further Environmental Review, with the oversaturation of the office within a mixeduse zoning district. To start, we have to ask ourselves, what is inconsistency and inconsistency mean . Within ceqa 15183, it says that section only applies to projects that are consistent with both a Community Plan that has been adopted as part of the general plan, which would be our Mission Area Plan, as well as a general as well as a general plan for the city. The Planning Commission found the same. I truly believe that this is not true. The general plan as cited within 101. 1 section, contains certain priority policies and whenever theres a question with regard to whether an action or a project is consistent, it is clearly stated within the priority policies that the priority policies shall be the basis upon which inconsistencies in the general plan are resolved. And both the general plan and the missare missionarea plan o make an informed decision about that. Today i say that theres two inconsistencies with the general plan that are particular for 2300 harrison. First, is a priority policy that states that existing housing and neighborhood character be conserved and protected in order to preserve the cultural and the heres the important Economic Diversity of our neighborhoods. Second, that a Diverse Economic base be maintained by protecting our industrial and Service Sectors from displacement due to commercial Office Development. And the future opportunities for resident employment resident employment as those that were existing at the time that those plans were made and ownership in those sectors are enhanced. Were you expecting to show more slides than just this slide . Because it remains on the first slide. No, that is not my intent at all. Clerk why dont you fix that and i will begin it again. You have five minutes left. And just for the record let it show that supervisor safai is present for the meeting. Okay, is this viewable now . Clerk yes. Okay, okay, thank you. Clerk youre welcome. Before we get into the inconsistencies, i think that its very important that we establish for ourselves exactly what we characterized as the neighborhood within this part of the Mission District. The Mission District at the time of the eastern neighborhoods plan was cited as being the home of latino lives within the neighborhood at almost 90 of the 30 of latinos resided within the mission and that 40 , 45 of those within the mission were foreign born. And that large segments of the Adult Population had not graduated from high school. And that the percentage was highest in the mission. And that the mission was the only neighborhood where Construction Trade workers ranked in the top 10. And establish specifically that for both immigrants and latinos and people of color that these type of jobs have historically relied upon the immigrant labor pool in regards to p. D. R. And that p. D. R. Was an important and a crucial part of the northeast mission which is where this project is being proposed. And had one of the largest shares of p. D. R. Within it. Within the general plan, there is they set out saying that we have to go and preserve our p. D. R. Within places that have been established for having p. D. R. To be protected. That is definitely within the missionarea plan in this part that used to be the northeast Mission Industrial zone. And the missionarea plan it was noted that doing nothing would be dangerous for p. D. R. Business because theyre vulnerable to competition from higher rent paying uses and that nonp. D. R. Requirement is required to also provide p. D. R. Space. I dont think that law was ever passed. The Diverse Economic base being maintained in our industry sector from displacement due to commercial Office Development is incredibly important, and especially this section that was specifically designed to limit office and to really try to broke p. D. R. , with an objective of 1. 1 of the missionarea plan that established that the northeast zone limit new office and Retail Development so that p. D. R. Could grow. This project is anything but a mixeduse as intended by this district. This project has 74 of connected tech office, only 23 of residential, and. 09 p. D. R. Within a zone that is supposed to be a mix of uses. The mix has not been maintained. We have allowed the Market Forces to go unregulated and the Market Forces of office have been pushing out and causing mass displacement of p. D. R. Within this mixeduse zone. The Planning Department and in their 2019 report estimated that they were setting a creation of 100,000 to 150,000squarefeet of p. D. R. Space. And yet here we are in 2018 and we lost over nearly 500,000squarefeet of p. D. R. Space. Within that same report, they noted that space lost in the mission appears to be due to the approvals of office uses that existed prior to 2008. 2300 harrison is one of those projects. And, again, this report concluded that should we do nothing left unconstrained the Market Forces and current zoning would push out p. D. R. So were seeing the wholesale displacement of p. D. R. But are there Job Opportunities for latinx and immigrants . That the neighborhood character be preserved to preserve the diversity of our neighborhoods. We know that the majority of latinos and immigrants within the mission do not have a graduate degree. Yet this sponsor is proposing to put in nearly 100,000squarefeet of office. Tech is not the most friendly in providing opportunities to people of color, to women, to anything that is to minority groups within within the u. S. Only around 3 to 6 of latinos are within the tech industry. So were proposing to put in 100,000 square feet of tech office of super minimal amounts of p. D. R. Within this space, and are we really going to say that those Economic Opportunities are going to be available to the latinos and to the immigrants that are still within this part of the mission that are the ones that define the character within the missionarea plan . And i say to you that it is not. And so for the failure to both fail to regulate office within a mixeduse district and allow it to to shift what should have been a true mix of uses into a more wh hoeause, and that allows opportunities to come in that are not for the people in the mission, we have a system that is inconsistent with the general plan and priority plan and policies. So in conclusion, i would just like to ask that you remain steadfast in uplifting communities of color, that you uphold this repeal and direct this project as proposed and send it back to planning to ensure that the project is consistent to the objectives of the priority plan policies and the missionarea plan. Thank you. President yee okay. Any questions . I dont see anybody on the roster for this. So, madam clerk, lets start the Public Comments for anybody that wants to support the appeal. Clerk okay, operations, i believe that we have six callers in the queue. The telephone number is crawling across your television, in addition to channel 26. I will provide that information, but, operations, if youre ready, please send the first caller. Caller supervisors, this appeal is something that should not come before the board of supervisors. But it has come before because whoever is the supervisor of that district hasnt been doing Due Diligence. On production, distribution and repair. Thats what p. D. R. Stands for. And when you go to our neighborhoods, the Mission Neighborhood, a lot of those businesses that used to do p p. D. R. Are now in the bayshore. So what are supervisors doing . And what are the other supervisors doing . That is a question that you should ask. If you are a supervisor, do you represent, do you save jobs, are you interested in qualityoflife issues . Or are you a representative just to spew diatribe, hot air, and be argumentive . Thank you very much. Clerk thank you for your comments. So the telephone number for those of you who havent yet called in is 1 415 6550001. The meeting i. D. Number is 146 427 4376. Its best if your location is quiet. Please make sure that your television is turned down or it will distract you from making your comments. If you get in line early and when you do call in, please press star, 3 one time. Otherwise, pressing it twice will move you back and forth in line. We have interpreters standing by. Very quickly, agnes lai, and two others. Please make yourself known. [speaking spanish] [speaking Foreign Language language]. [speaking Foreign Language] language]. Thank you. Clerk thank you very much for being here and assisting us. So we are now taking Public Comment for two minutes each on behalf of the appellant to the Planning Departments Community Plan evaluation. Operations, lets take the second caller. So, operations, i just want to make one repetitive statement. I want to say that the telephone number that the individuals call in is 1 415 6550001. And the meeting i. D. Number is 146 427 4376. Press pound, pound, and then press star, 3, to get in line to speak. Just received a text that some individuals are having difficulty getting in and i want to make sure that if you do not have a computer in front of you or the television isnt in front of you, then i have these instructions for you. Okay, so, operations, do we have the second speaker . Caller hello. This is myriam wisa and im calling to support the appeal of the Environmental Review for 2300 harrison. The project is not meeting the objectives of the missionarea plan with its vulnerable populations and this is a displacement. And it does not meet the needs of the community. And whereby p. D. R. Users are afraid theyll have to leave if this project moves forward. A lot of p. D. R. Place is set up indiscernible and for gentrification and the shutdown. The p. D. R. And the job places need support. And this is about people, jobs and businesses and it would be a tragedy if the p. D. R. Businesses that survived the shutdown were taken out by the developer who plans to build things that you dont need now. Offices and condos indiscernible , please support this appeal. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. We have 70 listeners and there are 28 members of the public in the queue. Were taking Public Comment on behalf of the appellant to the Community Plan evaluation for the 2300 harrison street. Next caller, please. Hello, caller, welcome. Caller hello, my name is freddy. And i am a member of the soma neighborhood Resident Council and also an organizer with s. D. A. I just wanted to say that this large Office Project will cause displacement to our residents, nonprofits and Community Serving businesses and blue collar spaces that provide goodpaying jobs for us. The communities of color are being disproportionately impacted by the covid crisis. The city has a duty to prioritize the needs of communities of color and to protect them from projects that will only further exacerbate racial inequities and to provide opportunities for communities of color. In order to qualify for this environmental fast tracking, the Community Plan exemption c. P. E. , the project must be in line with the missionarea plan. It is not. The subare missionarea plan and the city general plan call for protecting the Mission Industrial sector and limiting the office space into this area. 2300 harrison street will have the opposite impact. This project expands former Warehouse Space illegally converted and then legalized into a 100,000 tech hub that would have huge negative impacts on the working class and the Small Businesses nearby. I am almost a 10year resident of the soma neighborhood and i have lived in San Francisco all of my life. And this, you know, this will just really negatively impact the neighborhood as it has for years already. I yield my time. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Welcome, caller. Caller hello supervisors, my name is John Mccormick and i work in the tenderloin. And i am calling to support this appeal of 2300 harrison street. Im really concerned about this project because we have seen how devastating tech and new developments like this can be on communities of color. And weve seen it especially in the Mission Neighborhood where so many folks have been misplaced due to new condominiums and new Office Spaces and the reverberations of this goes so much further than just the mission. You can feel it in the tenderloin, you can feel it in soma, you can feel it all over this city as our culture is just sucked away by tech. And the last thing that i want to see is for more of this to happen. So im very concerned about this project and i really urge the supervisors to hear the public on this and to really listen and consider this appeal. It means a lot to the people who still have workingclass jobs in this city that this doesnt happen and we really fight a unified fight to make sure that we dont see more developments like this. So i urge you, please, consider this appeal and listen to the workingclass people of San Francisco. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, please unmute the next caller. Caller hi, my name is ryan miller and im a marine corps veteran and i was born in San Francisco. Theres neighborhoods that are like chinatown, like north beach, like the mission, that are cultural capitals in San Francisco. That are cultural capitals to the greater bay area. And with projects like 2300 harrison, we put those cultural capitals at risk. Most of the artist friends that i know dont live in San Francisco anymore. Theyre moving to l. A. , theyre moving out of state. Because its unaffordable. So if culture and art and inclusivity is important to the supervisors of San Francisco, then i urge you desperately to appeal this this project at 2300 harrison. We are not only concerned citizens, but we are also voters. And your decisions today will weigh heavily on how we vote. I yield the rest of my time. Thank you. Clerk thank you, caller. Operations will send in the next caller, and i just want to provide the telephone number again in case there are individuals who would like to call in and theyre not in front of the television or the computer. Its 1 415 6550001. With the meeting i. D. , 146 427 4376. Press pound twice. And then it will have you attend the meeting as a listener. When you are ready to provide Public Comment, press star, 3. And that puts you into the queue. You should not be distracted because you will miss when the prompts are telling you that youre unmuted and its your turn to speak. So turn your television down and dont be in a loud, noisy place. Okay, operations, please unmute the next caller. Caller hello. My name is Ashley Meredith and i support the appeal of the 2300 harrison Street Project. I moved to San Francisco 10 years ago as a youth fleeing an oppressive religious community, and i chose this as my home because i believed that it was a safe haven for progressive ideas and people from all walks of life would be accepted. Im one of the quote unquote newcomers and i work in technology. But over the last decade i have watched as more and more of the people who built this city have been displaced, while only Certain Industries flourish. And im here today because im listening to the residents, the nonprofits and the communityserving businesses who this project will most affect. Im here to urge the board of supervisors to do the same. The missionarea plan calls for maintaining a Diverse Economic base, by keeping it for industrial uses and limiting its office space growth. This project should not qualify for the environmental fast tracking. And this breeds selfishness and it threatens public life. A city is a place where people share public goods and in the course of sharing them they become part of the community. Again, i just want to encourage the board of supervisors to listen to the community and to commit to some other kind of office space use that would actually serve the neighborhood. Thank you. I yield my time. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Welcome, caller. Caller good afternoon, supervisors. Yes, good afternoon, supervisors, my name is gulad. And im calling to support the appeal of the 2300 harrison Street Project. And to second everyones point here, communities of color are being disproportionately impacted by the covid crisis. The city has a duty to prioritize the needs of communities of color and to project them from projects that exacerbate racial inequity and provide opportunities for communities of color. On that note as well, the new norm now is for everybody to work remotely from home during this covid crisis, so why need Tech Office Space when thats the case . What we do need is we need office space that is going to provide bluecollar jobs for the neighborhood with potential room for growth. Or Nonprofit Services that people need at this time right now when people are struggling. So i urge once again to just appeal this to support this appeal of this project and to protect the p. D. R. Spaces that could be negatively impacted by the approval of 2300 harrison. I yield my time as well. Thank you so much. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. We want to welcome the caller. Caller hello. My name is mark dean and im calling because i want to support the appeal of the 2300 project 2300 harrison project. The mission i have lived in the miss my entire life and im 24 years old. And i want this neighborhood to continue to flourish, even though there has been a lot of attempts to destroy the culture that has been created in this neighborhood. This neighborhood used to be an irish neighborhood until those people felt they wanted better homes in a different neighborhood. And now that we created this culture and this neighborhood, people want to come and to take it from us. So i dont understand why people want to continue to build things in the mission for people who are not from the mission. I dont understand why this city prioritizes people from outside of the city and doesnt prioritize the people that have put in their blood, sweat and tears into this city. But 2300 harrison Street Project does not comply with the missionarea plan. It would destroy p. D. R. Organizations and companies and workers, people who lived their whole life trying to make a better life for themselves and for their families. This project doesnt take into doesnt take into it doesnt take people who are already here in the neighborhood who are already workingclass people in San Francisco. I have been here for years, it does not take them into consideration. This is just for the people who want to come here and to feel some type of culture into their lives. The people who have created the culture are being pushed out and a project like 230 2300 harrison will continue to do just that. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Were currently taking Public Comment on behalf of the appellant for the appeal of the Planning Departments Community Plan evaluation. Hello, caller. Caller hello. My name is indiscernible and im calling in support of appeals 2300 harrison street. Im concerned this large Office Project will displace residents, nonprofits and communities that provide goodpaying jobs for the people in the mission. Furthermore, i think that this doesnt qualify for the environmental fast tracking for a few reasons. The first being that the project doesnt protect the Mission Industrial sector. Instead, it converts former Warehouse Space that was illegally converted and then legalized into a tech hub that will drive up prices on the industrial streets around it. And the culture, protecting p. D. R. Businesses and a diverse array of jobs. If the tech hub were approved we can expect the displacement of familyowned businesses, their jobs and the Ownership Opportunities because they cannot afford the subsequent rise in rent price. Furthermore, this project is attempting to create a loophole in the state law, the state density bonus law, that was intended to build more housing for the community. This is unethical and unfair for the hardworking people of the mission. The its never a time to unmute the livelihoods of other people, but with the presence of covid, this could not be a worst time to do so. And i would like to say that im somebody who works in tech and i believe that tech has spread enough and has enough money to be able to open up offices anywhere in the world. And on top of that, to pay people to move to their location, wherever they may be. They have the money for flexibility, whereas our local resident does not have that flexibility. So if anything, we should use our dollars to protect and to serve the residents and the local people in San Francisco and in the bay area in general. Especially if you look around in San Francisco, in the mission, in the tenderloin, and the homelessness is the worst that it is. And we are supposed to be the richest nation on earth . This is completely unethical and we have to rethink how we use our money. Thank you. Clerk thank you. Operations, unmute the next caller, please. Caller good afternoon, supervisors. My name is Ellen Rosenthal and im calling to support the appeal of the Environmental Review for this project. Because it does not meet the objectives of the missionarea plan. I am a photographer and i had a studio building at 17th and mission. There was a large group of artists in this studio, about 70 different artists. And we were all evicted in july 2015, because the landlord wanted to remove everybody and to get different tenants who could pay much more for their rent. There were many nonprofits in that building also and they may have stayed for a while but theyre gone. That building is completely empty now. And what i wanted to say was a city that is willing to allow artists, nonprofits, and small manufacturers to exist in a vulnerable position only to be evicted whenever landlords want to charge higher rent, is a city doing a disservice to itself and to the artists and the nonprofits who want so badly to do their work. And thats all i have to say today. Thank you very much. I yield therest of my time. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Caller good afternoon, supervisors. Mim the cochair of the indiscernible congress. And im calling in solidarity with my Mission Neighbors in support of the appeal for 2300 harrison street. You know, i think that theres real concerns. I think that first and foremost i just want to say that this project doesnt qualify, or shouldnt qualify for the fast tracking approval because simply it is in conflict with the values and the policies of the missionarea plan. And it doesnt qualify for that fast track. And theres clearly other reasons. The mission culture, and protecting the industrial sector and the p. D. R. Jobs. And this plan does exactly the opposite of what the spirit of the missionarea plan is about and what the general plan is calling for. Also when we talk about planning were talking about projects that are necessary and desirable and this plan, this project, is neither of those things. It doesnt meet the need of the neighborhood. It doesnt meet the need of the time that were in. It doesnt meet the need of the people in that community. Its just another nail on the coffin of this great cultural treasure of miss. And we have seen devastating impacts in the mission over the last five to 10 years. And continuing that sort of planning and allowing that to sort of development is unimaginable, unthinkable, and unethical in my opinion. We need to be protecting this community from exactly this type of project. The developers of this project need to go back, they need to sit down with the community and actually come up with a plan that benefits the community as a whole. Something that works for the community. And not office space. There needs to be spaces that actually serve the community. Clerk thank you, sir. Thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Caller good afternoon, supervisors. My name is gabrielle, and im the policy and planning manager at t. E. D. C. And im here to have support for the appeal of the 2300 harrison. Were not opposed to office space in this city, but we are opposed to developers explicitly taking advantage of a law that is intended for Housing Production. To fast track a tech hub that does not serve the surrounding area. We are opposed to the development that has now intention of Offering Community safety for those at risk of displacement, or opportunity for the workingclass residents and the latino families in the neighborhood. I would also like to point out that one of our lowincome housing developments, the mosaica is one block away from the proposed project where we serve mostly families and some seniors. We have an opportunity here to say no to a project that failed to center racial and social equity in community collaboration. So we kindly ask the supervisors to support this appeal and to request that the project sponsors reconsider this plan, work with the community to mitigate the impacts of gentrification, prevent harm to p. D. R. Spaces and businesses, and develop something that will actually serve the neighborhood. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, please unmute the next caller. Welcome, caller. Caller welcome, thanks. This is Chris Lawrence calling from 623 avenue, adjacent to the 2300 harrison project. I just want to say that i believe that this project will change the area rental ability for this p. D. R. Clerk sir, im going to pause your time for a moment. I believe that youre speaking on behalf of the actual project, correct . Not the appellant . If that is true, im going to ask you to you are speaking on behalf of the project it sounds like. And if that is true, im going to ask you to hit press star, 3, to just put yourself back in listening mode. We are going to finish Public Comment on behalf of the appellant, and then take the departments, and then take the Public Comment for those individuals who support the project. Caller im not in support of the project. Clerk okay, it was sounding like you were, so my apologies. And im press your time. Here we go. Caller thank you. I am not in support of the project. I believe that it will change the ability for p. D. R. Rental in the future. I believe that it will push out the p. D. R. Businesses, including mine, if this office space was to go in. And i would hope that the rest of the people are able to call in, and if they are not, i speak on behalf of saving the p. D. R. Businesses and to not have this project go through. Thank you for your time, supervisors. Clerk thank you, apologies once again to you, sir. Operations, is there another caller . Caller hello . Can you hear me . Clerk yes, we can. Welcome. Caller okay, great. My name is lou dematais and im a 40year resident of the mission and i support this appeal because this project does not support the missionarea plan and really it doesnt do anything for the neighborhood. It doesnt do anything for the community. Its really for people and businesses outside of the community. Weve had a problem as other people have mentioned keeping p. D. R. In the district because theres no commercial rent control and a lot of times businesses, p. D. R. Gets forced out. And this project would only make it worse. It provides almost no p. D. R. Whereas the neighborhood plan calls for more p. D. R. So we need to support the p. D. R. Its going to put more pressure on the community and force more residents out of the mission. Its going to increase gentrification at the time where renters are facing the covid pandemic, and as always its very difficult to find housing in this city. And this would only make it worse. And i kind of appeal to you, to the supervisors, kind of maybe its an emotional appeal. But you are finding that theres a lot of opposition from the residents of the mission because we love our neighborhood. This we are very involved in the neighborhood and its not easy, but we think so much about it that we will take our time to do whatever it is to try to make the community and the neighborhood a better place. And i think that at this time in the history of our country when theres so much division, i think that we need your help, we need the supervisors help, to support us to develop a very vibrant and a community that cares about its residents and wants to keep it the way that it is. And even to make it better. And for those reasons i support the appeal of the project. Clerk thank you for your comments. We have 80 listeners on the line and 27 members of the public who would like to make comment. Were currently taking Public Comment on behalf of the appellant. Youll have up to two minutes. Operations, unmute the next caller, please. Welcome, caller. Caller hello, supervisors, this is anastasia anapolous. And i live close to the mission area. And i support the appeal of 2300 harrison street. And i encourage you to do the same because the streamline review process was incorrect. The decision was inconsistent with the general plan. And the missionarea plan. The Planning Departments decision was also inconsistent with the resolution they had adopted to ensure equitable treatment of people of color. This neighborhood is a Latino Community about 90 of the residents are latinos. And a great percentage of whom are not high school graduates. A proposal to eliminate p. D. R. Use in favor of 100,000squarefoot of office space is a travesty. Only having. 09 p. D. R. , 23 residential, and who knows what percentage would be affordable, and a thousand square feet of office space is inconsistent with the priority of promoting Economic Diversity of the communities who live there. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next caller, please. Caller hi, my name is Travis Miller and i call to support the appeal for 2300 harrison street development. And as so many people have said, its like this its like who is this building serving . You know, the. 09 p. D. R. And its going to have a tremendously negative impact on the community thats there. And right now the communities of color are already trying to weather the storm of the covid. And to have a Development Like this is just going to be its ridiculous. And i just think that its totally bogus. So im calling for the appeal. I think that its just going to put tremendous hardship on the community thats already trying to endure tremendous hardship. And i urge you all to support the appeal as well. Thank you very much. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next caller, please. Caller good afternoon, supervisors. Kelly hill with united and save the mission and the p. D. R. Business owner in the neighborhood calling in support of this appeal. This project is problems with the density bonus, especially in a sensitive community. Using every loophole possible to build this, they are creating a 75foot high wall adjacent to the Outdoor Recreation space of John Oconnell high school and multiple p. D. R. Businesses that are historically vulnerable and have expressed their own survival in economic concerns. And if the waivers are granted, the massive floor plates can be joined as a 96,000squarefoot office space, creating a space almost double the threshold. The project will only provide jobs for the highest income earners and it makes precious wellpaying jobs only available to 3 to 6 of the latinx population. And the peculiarity of the site and the size of the new building will eliminate the utilized space in front of several p. D. R. Businesses, one which is using that space for survival for the foreseeable future in the covid era. We just cant afford to lose anymore p. D. R. Spaces. In the appeal theres ceqa guidelines and case law examples, including where ceqa places the burden of environmental investigation on the government rather than the public. It also states that lead agencies shall consider these held by members of the public in all areas affected. As clearly laid out, it is in conflict with the core elements of the missionarea plan and the general plan and should not go forward until the city and the project are approved. please stand by including the artists, the t. D. R. Small business owners, and the people of color. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next caller, please. Hi. My name is gary gregorson. Im the president of the red stone temple Labor Association. Were the Labor Association in the historic red Stone Building at 16 and capp. We are a p. D. R. Building, and i just want to speak in support of the appeal. I agree with all the points everyone has brought it up brought up so far. I just want to say, were one of the last Community Serving buildings in the commission, and a lot of organizations that have already been displaced have come to our building, and so yeah, i dont think this project fits the neighborhood, and it doesnt fit with the times and whats currently happening, especially in terms of how much office space is already in the pipeline in places like soma, so i dont understand why we need more Tech Office Space in the mission. I definitely see room for more affordable unit i definitely see room for more organizations that serve the community. Theres a definite need for that. So again, i speak in favor of the appeal. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next caller, please. Hello. Clerk welcome. Hello . Hi, thank you. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is sharon stoyer, and im actually pleading with you to support this appeal in the mission. By 2017, we were completely displaced by illegally zoned tech offices. We were lied to by zoning enforcement or zoning looked the other way. We tried to develop another large space in the mission, but affordable space in the mission by then had become completely impossible because we were competing against unlimited funds by the tech offices. Although six of us were able to stay together, creating a new studio near balboa park b. A. R. T. , it is one of the few areas that is transit accessible for artists and blue collar workers. And also, a third of our final artists, when we lost our studio, permanently relocated out of San Francisco. So we were not only losing studio space but losing the creatives that were occupying the studio spaces, and weve watched as most of our spaces and creative businesses have been systematically replaced by tech offices, so its nearly impossible to work in the mission. So in addition to the loss of the spaces, projects such as this the proposal here would continue to perpetuate our citys history of racial injustices that allow the displacement of artists with young white mostly tech workers. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, please unmute the next caller. Welcome, caller. Hello, hello, supervisors. My name is brett turner, and im calling to support the appeal of 2300 harrison. Weve been looking at this from a multitude of directions and with a good group of people. I just wanted to relay a couple of points. We want to associate ourselves with all the previous callers and statements, and also just stand against the displacement and stand with the community here. I hope that you all recognize the times that were in, and obviously, these are very strange times, and often in these times, there is duty to to come forward and standup for the community, and were hoping you do that. This appears to believe a loophole project, and with the current covid environment, we think its obvious that we should go ahead and stand with the community, again, and all the previous speakers and support the appeal of this 2300 harrison. Thank you very much. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Hi. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is franklin ballis, and im calling in to support the appeal of the 2300 harrison project. The mission has attempted to displace the people, the roots theyre here to represent. Im a San Francisco native, and as supervisor and am a director and member of calle 24 and united to save the mission. The mission is not a playground or place for tech, and the developer should go back to the drawing board until they have a an equitable approach on racial and social equity and for when they even tried to engage with our communities. To hold Developers Accountable is the only way to disapprove exclusion of people of color. Again, im calling in support of the appeal of 2300 harrison. Clerk operations, unmute the next caller. We have 63 members of the public listening, and 17 callers in the queue. My name is eric arguello, and i am a member of calle 24 and united to save the mission. Many of my family members worked in the area over the years, and the jobs are gone, and they are gone, also. The Mission Area Plan over the years have been shelved and not used as a guide the way it was intended. We need to have Economic Diversity in the city and prioritize the need. This was not the plan for the mission. We need to have racial and social equity, so please uphold the appeal. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Welcome, caller. Okay. Caller, keep trying okay. Great. Welcome. Hello . Clerk yes, we can hear you. Welcome. Oh, thank you. My name is lorenzo, and im a member of the soma resident neighborhood council. Im calling in to support the bill on 2300 harrison street. I believe this proposed large Office Project is not what our community needs. We need more of p. D. R. Businesses and Affordable Housing rather than tech offices. I think projects like what is being proposed for 2300 harrison will cause displacement to our lowincome and workingclass residents in the mission. I work in soma and the tenderloin neighborhoods. [inaudible] nonprofits and Community Serving businesses. Rents for both residential and commercial spaces went up in our neighborhood. I dont understand why the city is prioritizing the project that we dont need. This project is also in conflict with the citys area plan and Mission Area Plan. Also, we shouldnt allow the developers to employed the density bonus laws [inaudible] especially during exploit the density bonus laws [inaudible] during the pandemic. I ask the developers to go back to the drawing board to create a Development Plan that actually serves the community. I yield my time. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Hello, caller. For those of you who feel we havent called on you, we always circle back to give members of the public a second or third chance to come on and provide their comments to the board, so caller, i think youre there. Welcome. Hi. Hello. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is mary rote, and im calling in support of the appeal for 2300 harrison street. I work at the [inaudible] serving seniors and adults with disabilities, and time and time again, we pose the same question who are you working for . I stand with the workingclass residents and latino families in the neighborhoods that are demanding spaces that reflect the neighborhood, that protect the neighborhood, that serve the neighborhood. Businesses that protect the community are always welcome, however, the project sponsors have seemed to commit to a space that does not serve the neighborhood. This project has not made any commitments to lowincome and workingclass communities of color who are severely underrepresented in the Tech Community, so we ask you to please support the communitys request for equitable planning. Thank you so much. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. For those of you that are waiting to be called on, if you can hear the proceedings in the background, that means number one, youre connected to the system. Number two, if youre kind of lost and youre not sure if youre in line to speak and just listening, press star three, and when it does indicate that youve raised your hand and you will be called onto speak, just wait until it is your turn, and i will say yes, welcome, and we can hear you. I apologize for those of you that are trying, and its so difficult to access the system. But we will stay at this as long as youre willing to participate, and operations, next caller, please. Yes. Hello, supervisors can you hear me . Clerk yes, we can. Welcome. Okay. Hi. My name is elizabeth, and im calling to voice my support for the appeal of the 2300 harrison project. Ive been a member of the community for is15 years. I oppose the project for a number of reasons, but the main one is its not in compliance with the mission area Development Plan, and it does nothing to benefit the community. The space would better serve the community if it excuse me consisting community instead by bringing in office space that does im sorry. This office space does nothing for the existing residents. Building Tech Office Space in a time when people are switching to a workfromhome model is an unwise decision, and i would ask you to support the community as a whole. I yield my time. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Hello. My name is miriam, and i am calling in support of the appeal of 2300 harrison. Ive experienced firsthand the dissonance of two cities that have catered its geography to specific groups. The future of the mission, and im sure everyone listening would agree, should incorporate the people of the mission, the same people who voted and trusted their politicians and officials to keep their communities safe. This furthers Class Division rather than closing the gap, and with the Rising Economic inequities during a mismanaged pandemic, a new Office Project seems only to take advantage of the shock that residents are in rather than alleviate the concerns that theyve raised. Since this project does not benefit longterm residents of the mission and also does not align with the mission area general plan and the city general plan, it does not qualify for the plan exemption. This seeks to right the wrongs that both our local governments and federal governments have made in the past decades. Clerk thank you for your comments. We have 67 listeners and 14 members in the queue ready to make their testimony. Operations, unmute the next caller. Welcome. Good afternoon. My name is larissa petrucelli with united to save the mission. I have seen firsthand the loss of my p. D. R. Neighbors, collaborators, and businesses that support my own business. Ive seen the bleeding of the missions well paying working class jobs that are the backbone of our immigrant community. The loss and trauma to myself and my community is so great that i struggle not to get emotional. I struggle to watch projects like this moving forward when theyre clearly antithetical plans to the purpose of the mission. The city is willing to fast track them with the c. B. E. Process while no metrics of their harm is being measured. They converted their adjacent buildings from p. D. R. To office, which ended up being grandfathered with no penalties and no assessment to the harm that conversion created, and now, we want to lineup the floor plates of this project and deal the final blow to adjacent p. D. R. Users. More jobs leading to more displacement. But today, it doesnt have to happen, and today, you can demonstrate with data by approving jobs that align with the Mission Area Plan. Today can be the day that you say to this Latinx Community that placing on them the onus to defend themselves from environmental harm is no more. Please look to the case law of gentry versus murrieta, and thank you for your time. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Thank you very much. This is Francisco Herrera from the San Francisco daly womens collective. Im calling to support the appeal for the project here on harrison. P. D. R. Is very helpful to our immigrant communities to be able to build their livelihood. This project is one more displacement project for a community. I appeal to the board to please appeal. Thank you very much. I yield the rest of my time. Adios. Clerk thank you for your comments. Okay. Operations, please provide us the next caller. Hello. My name is [inaudible] and im calling to support the appeal on the 2300 harrison. [inaudible]. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Can you hear me now . Clerk yes, mr. Pillpau. Yes, its david pillpau. I think appellant has met his burden that additional review is warranted. Youve already heard from many concerned citizens that have articulated environmental and other concerns about the project, evidence of controversy that supports conducting additional Environmental Review. I urge you to overturn the Planning Departments decision, table 27, and approve items 28 and 29 today. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. We want to welcome the next caller. Hello, you have up to two minutes. Were taking Public Comment on behalf of the appellant. Welcome. Hello . Clerk yes, welcome. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is [inaudible] and im calling to support this appeal on the 2300 harrison Street Project. I was a resident in the mission since 1994, and most recently an employee in the neighborhood at impact s. F. This project is in conflict with core elements of the Mission Area Plan and the San Francisco general plan, and so this as stated it does not qualify for fast track approval known as Community Plan exception. We look for projects that support and give back, not displace our communities like this one. Putting people above profits is now more important than ever. Thanks for your time. Clerk thank you for your comments. We have 67 listeners and ten members of the public who would like to provide their testimony. We want to welcome the next caller. Hi, we can hear you. Hello . Okay. Caller, can you hear us . Youre in the queue to speak. Its possible well circle back to that person. Operations okay. Can you hear me . Clerk yes, we can. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is christopher satten, and im calling on behalf of project [inaudible] in the mission, which has been a project in the mission for 28 years. I also have worked with the goodyear project and helped to oversee the [inaudible] in the mission at 15th and julian. Were in support of the appeal of the 2300 harrison project because this is in violation of the San Francisco general plan and mission plan. Were also apposed to tech office opposed to tech Office Spaces that make no offer for workinglas people in the neighborhood. [inaudible] projects like this also in terms of opportunity do not offer jobs directly to our residents in the neighborhood. [inaudible] for four years and oversaw the [inaudible] turn into a nonprofit in the Mission District, and i know that became one of the hottest spots to work at. So again, i am calling to support the appeal of the 2300 harrison project. Thank you so much. Clerk thank you for your comments. Okay. Operations, lets welcome the next caller. Hello, caller . I believe youre unmuted but you may not know it. Hello . All right, operations. Perhaps well circle back to the caller. We want to welcome the next caller. Hello . Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is desiree. Im calling in support of the appeal of 2300 harrison street. The project will cause large d displacement. Communities of color are being disproportionately affected by displacement projects and providing a lack of opportunities for communities of color. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, lets welcome the next caller, please. Hello, caller, we can hear you. Frgs you. Okay, operations, perhaps well circle back to these hello. Can you hear me . Clerk yes, we can. Hello. My name is susan [inaudible] i work with the plaza 16 coalition thats been fighting gentrification and displacement in the mission for last six years. I want to thank you for struggling with the technology and getting callers in, but im getting a lot of messages from callers who are having trouble to get in. I just want to let you know for every westeone you hear from, theres many others who cant get in. This is a crisis. All this additional Tech Office Space is the last thing that the Mission Needs right now. This project is insane, especially right now during covid, when so many tech workers are working from home and planning to continue to work from home after covid. They have recently announced that most of their employees who are working from home will continue to work from home through 2021. We do not need more Tech Office Space. Please, many of you were elected to the board of supervisors because we know that you understand whats happening to our cities. This is a moment when you can do the right thing and say no to further destructions of the cultural gem that is the mission, and say no to further displacement of workers and residents in the mission. Thank you for your time. Clerk and thank you for your comments. Ok vote in favor of the appeal and approve items 28 and 29. We are concerned about approving the state density bonus whose purpose is to increase the housing bonus, not office supply. This convenient sanction of loopholes should not be supported by this board. I heard many comments about using a racial lens and justice lens in planning. This is the time to do that right now, so i ask you to please vote in support of this appeal. Thank you so much. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, can we queue the next caller . Good afternoon. Yes. My name is chris urdi, and im calling in support of the appeal at 2300 harrison. I feel this project is in conflict with the Mission Area Plan. I am the owner of restoration workshop. I am an architectural mill worker and general contractor, the last of my sort who specializes in historic western civilization and restoration work. My business is on treat avenue across the street from the 2300 harrison project, and i share the block with four other p. D. R. S, and we are, you know, a small company, but i do employ eight highly skilled, high paid employees who do live in San Francisco with, you know, quality jobs and were quite ethically diverse. I do believe this project would create some pretty bad adverse rent incentives, which would end up driving my business and United Pacific it would be damaging to our businesses. But we all ship and receive product, were in and out a great deal. This project would eliminate vital parking in the area. It would put their parking garage on an already extremely congested street, where we dodge other trucks when we get deliveries. In the 12 years ive been in the mission, i have watched so many shops and studios disappear and go away wo woodshops, all manner of artisans, and i dont see where this project provides any particular benefit to the neighborhood. Its using a great number of loopholes to achieve its goals. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, lets welcome the next caller. Hello, caller, are you there . Hello . Clerk hi, welcome. Hello . Can you hear me . Clerk yes, we can, welcome. Yes, we can hear you. Oh, thank you. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is maria de la mora, and im a resident thats been here for 62 years, and im a member of the calle 24 neighborhood benefit district. This project would further impact our community negatively, especially at this time of covid. It will further evict and displace more residents. Ive already been a a person to have been displaced, and i was in the dotcom boom, and everything just started pushing people out. This project is trying to gain more of the density bonus, and it shouldnt be used for offices, it should be used for housing. We need housing, we need to bring back our community. I know that this is going to affect us in the mission. We have people out on the street that need houses. We dont need offices. We have plenty of offices downtown. Some of these Office Spaces are vacant, and we dont need this in the mission. Not now. We have to focus on our families and people that are out on the street right now. This time of covid is not a time that we should think of putting money in our pockets, so thats what the mentality and mindset of these developers are. We need to think about our residents, lifelong residents or people who have been here. Like i said, ive been displaced before. Clerk thank you. Thank you for your comments. Okay. We have 62 listeners, and six callers in the queue. Operations, next caller. Hello, supervisors. My name is tau robinson, and im calling to support the appeal of 2300 harrison street. Not only is it going to have impacts on the community of the mission by increasing rent, it does not qualify for the environmental fast tracking, and its going to hurt the Light Industrial businesses that are in the area. Thank you. I yield my time. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Hello. Can you hear me . Clerk hello. Welcome. Im one of the founders of calle 24 neighborhood benefit district. Im calling in to oppose this project, and the fact that i hear the bonus street density is being used for tech hub for office use is kind of ridiculous. I mean, ive heard several other people complain about lets follow the Mission Area Plan. Its like why arent we following the Mission Area Plan . People are dying in the streets right now. Covid is taking friends of mine, grandparents, and its like its ridiculous right now that were talking about tech hub and office space. We need to uphold the appeal on this, and we need to send a message that this kind of gentrification cant keep happening. We need to get all on the same page. Please uphold this bill. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, lets welcome the next caller. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is tanya valoria from the tenderloin, and im calling to support the appeal on the 2300 harrison Street Project because i dont believe its necessary to have more Office Spaces when we need more housing across the city. Most concerned that a large Office Project like this will exacerbate the prices and gentrification that has haunted the city for many years now. This development of High End Office Space like this caters to the tech industry, and weve seen in the pandemic that those types of jobs can actually work remotely and have other options than other industries, instead of industries that have working place jobs for people in the communities like the mission, where we need them, not tech offices, but opportunities for the community of the mission. We should also not allow developers to game the density bonus laws, and if you allow them to do so, they can do so in my neighborhood, the tenderloin. We need to hold them accountable, so i urge the members of this board to please uphold this appeal, and thank you for your time. Clerk thank you for your comments. All right. We have five members of the public in the queue making testimony. Welcome, caller. You have up to two minutes. Hello. [inaudible] i live in the tenderloin [inaudible] and im with everyone else concerning this project because as we all know, displacement has been happening all over, and now, theyre building a big Office Building [inaudible] and with the Tech Community and prices going up, i think it should be stopped. They should not be allowed to use any loopholes to move forward. I think [inaudible] because people are suffering on the streets while you allow this to go up. We dont need it. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Hi. Im [inaudible], and i echo most of the sentiments that have been mentioned. The first is rent and housing being unaffordable for most of those people. Stephanie, i think, makes a very clear point. This is an unfair transaction. For the city, were losing housing. At a time like this, where people are suffering from displacement, its appalling to allow Something Like this to go forward. What does it say about us as a city caring about its residents . We are already seeing a mass outflow of residents from the bay area. Is it because we dont stand for anything . And then, what kind of businesses do we support in the city . We need to support organizations that will be community centered, that believe in growing intentionally, and the benefit of the local the historic red e building. We support this appeal. It has netted its obligations to be supported by your vote today. Ive heard and encourage you to pay heed to the intent of the current Mission Area Plan and strengthen it further to avoid the impacts that youre hearing today about this kind of tech Office Project. The density bonus should not be used should be used for housing and not be a loophole for massive Office Projects in the mission. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, is there another caller . Hi. My name is samaya, and im calling to support the appeal at 2300 harrison street. Im concerned that this is a large Office Project that is not in line with the Mission Area Plan at all and therefore cant qualify for environmental fast tracking for a few reasonsment first, the project reasons. First, it converts former Warehouse Space, which is illegal illegally converted and then legalized to office space. If this tech hub were approved, we can expect the displacement of surrounding blue collar, family owned businesses, their jobs and Ownership Opportunities because they cannot afford the rise in rent price. Were not opposed to Office Spaces that will offer Community Safety or opportunity for the working class, but guewe are opposed to office space that will cause the displacement of families that work by the building. It is never a good time to enrich the livelihoods with so many people, but this could not be a worse time to do so. I urge you to please consider. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, lets welcome the next caller. Good afternoon. My name is angelica, and im with somcan, and im calling in support of that peappeal and tt Environmental Review of for 2300 harrison as it does not meet the objectives of the Mission Area Plan. In the south of market, we already see the impacts of more Office Spaces that are not housing nonprofits, that are not Housing Services for our community or jobs that will create more opportunities in it our community. I think its very its very and also really alarming that the density bonus is being used for this site, and we definitely dont want to see that happening in other parts of the city, like the south of market. As were moving forward with race and equity, i hope the supervisors will really listen to the Mission Community and how this project is not supporting the vision, and that this will actually harm the community and result in the gentrification and displacement of the existing community, so please support the appeal and dont let this also happen in other parts of the city. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, is there another caller . Operator madam clerk, that completes the queue. Clerk thank you. Mr. President . President yee okay. Thank you. Thank you for your comments from the public. At this time, i would like to ask the Planning Department to do their presentation, and they have ten minutes. It sounds like supervisor ronen is trying to Say Something . Supervisor ronen im getting texts from some of the advocates for the appellant that they were kicked out of the queue. Is there a way we can do another to make sure we got everyone . Clerk if you reopen Public Comment on behalf of the appellant, i know that communications would be happy to unmute them and send them through. President yee okay. Then i will do what im supposed to do, reopen Public Comment clerk on behalf of the appellant. President yee thank you. Clerk okay. Operations, can you please welcome the next caller. Thank you, supervisor ronen, for letting us know. Supervisor ronen of course. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is peter papadopoulos. Im calling today to speak in favor of the appeal, and we ask you to please support this appeal. You know, first of all, i want to make sure that meta is not opposed to tech uses. Its just when youre putting them into highly sensitive areas, and what is the impacts of putting these workers in this area such as the northeast former industrial zone. We along with many others suggested that the project simply adopt other office uses, which are very desired. Such as, for example, theres a Dialysis Center moving in down the street, bwhich im sure is paying a pretty Fair Market Rent with a good outcome. But this type of development will continue to displace our middle classworkers, and were going to continue to lose our p. D. R. Businesses, our latino families, our immigrants that have good paying jobs that rely on p. D. R. , often without a college agrdegree. So thats why we voted for you, is to make this kind of use precisely illegal, but this kind of use is still on the books. So to talk about consistency for a moment, i think what wed like to see is the Planning Department, under the law, has to prove that this is consistent with the general plan and Mission Area Plan for starters, showing how theyre leasing Tech Office Space, which would be around 150 square feet per worker, not the 300 square feet worker they typically use, and how does that compile with housing retail, etc. , to make the Community Growth impact that shows that we are not beyond our limit. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Great. Thank you for your comments. I want to remind the members of the public who are trying to access Public Comment right now, after you dial the number and enter the access code, and you press pound, pound, then please dont forget to press starthree. That will get you into public testimony. Okay. Can we welcome the next caller, operations . Hi. My name is Marie Sorenson of calle 24 and united to save the mission. Theres massive housing displacement due to all the luxury development. P. D. R. Space has shrunk, only to be replaced by the anything goes u. M. U. Zoning. The office space should be kept downtown and not in neighborhoods. Our neighborhood is disappearing in favor of just flat out greed. Please deny this project moving forward. I yield my time. Clerk thank you. Operations, lets welcome the next caller. Operator madam clerk, that completes the queue. Clerk okay. Okay. Any other persons trying to reach out to you, supervisor ronen, who are having problems . Supervisor ronen no. Clerk okay. Thank you. President yee okay. If the Planning Department would like to do a presentation, you have up to ten minutes. Hi. Good afternoon, president yee and members of the board. My name is ryan shum, senior environmental planner. This presentation highlights a few points that are in the departments detailed responses, including the august 14 detailed response to the appellants letter dated august 7. [inaudible] for the proposed 2300 harrison Street Project. The large project authorization and Office Allocation granted by the Planning Commission are also on appeal and will be heard by the board of appeals on august 26, 2020. The California Environmental quality act, or ceqa, mandates that projects that are consistent with the Development Density established by a Community Plan or for which an e. I. R. Was certified shall not require additional Environmental Review unless there are significant effects peculiar to the project or its site that were not disclosed as significant effects in the prior e. I. R. The department determined that the project is consistent with the Development Density established under the eastern neighbored plan for the project site because the project is consistent with the types of land uses, density, and height and bulk limit as permitted by the zones for the site, which was established pursuant to plan. This site was rezoned to u. M. U. And a 68x height and bulk district. The uses for the project are permitted and the project complies with the development controls through the state density bonus law. Modifications of Development Standards as required under the state density bonus law do not mean that a project is inconsistent with existing zones. In previous c. P. E. Appeals, the board of supervisors upheld previous projects were consistent with zoning. The courts have also held that the use of state density bonus does not include a determination that the project is consistent with plan. The Department Notes there is pending lawsuit to prohibit office plans in u. M. U. Districts within the mission plan area. The legislative process is underway but has not yet been completed. Therefore, we are here to determine the current permitted uses. The appellant wants to state that the project is inconsistent with certain policies outlined in the mission plan and general plan. However, those policies are broader objectives for the mission as a whole and cannot be adequately addressed on a parcelbyparcel basis. As described in the c. P. E. , no existing housing or businesses would be displaced by the project. The arguments being made by the appellant today can be more appropriately considered by the board of appeals, which has broader discretion. Ceqa guidelines requires potential and consistent fees with plans and policies to be disclosed, however, inconsistencies are not significant impacts in and of themselves. The purpose of disclosing them is to identify whether additional undisclosed physical environmental impacts could occur. To that end, the department has conducted a thorough projectspecific and cumulative analysis of the environmental impacts of the proposed project and determined that the project would not result in new or more severe adverse environmental impacts than disclosed in the eastern neighborhoods e. I. R. Therefore, preparation of the c. P. E. Was appropriate. The appellant is incorrect in their assertion that the fair argument standard applies for this project. The standard of review for the departments c. P. E. Determination for this project is substantial evidence, which applies to subsequent project consistent with the development and city in a Community Plan where an e. I. R. Has been prepared and certified for the Community Plan. The citation and the letter are cited in preparation of an initial study leading to a mitigated negative declaration or an e. I. R. However, for the reasons above, this project qualified for a c. P. E. As the appellant has not presented any impacts peculiar to the project site or that could be substantially mitigated by a position of a uniformly applied policy or standard. A c. P. E. Is the appropriate environmental process and document for this denied. We welcome any questions the board may have. Thank you. President yee supervisor ronen . Supervisor ronen yes. Thank you so much, president yee. I just have one question. I thought the appellant brought up a really interesting point that i hadnt seen or noticed before on questioning whether or not this project is eligible for a fast track plan. Ceqa section 15183 is the section that deck indicates when to use a c. P. E. Banking off the mission area neighborhoods e. I. R. Within 15183 or several subsections, and they are very confusing. The planning report references 15183a, but the appellant flags 15183d, which says that these are only projects consistent with the Community Plan but does not mention density. And then, there is 15183i2, which is development being consistent with density. Id like to hear from the city attorney. Does 15183d, which the appella appella appellant cites, not apply here . Ms. Pearson thank you, supervisor ronen. Ann pearson, city attorneys office. 15183 is considered consistent if the Development Density meets that, is consistent with that plan. Under state law, the zoning is required to be consistent with the Community Plan, so if the project is consistent with the city plan, its really considered consistent with the Community Plan, as well. Supervisor ronen the language is very confusing. Ms. Pearson it says that the section shall apply to projects that only meet the following conditions. Zoning adjustments on which the project would be [inaudible] and a local agency. So i dont know if d1a is actually meant here . Ms. Pearson supervisor, that is part of the question before you, whether or not there are facts to support that the project is consistent with the Community Plan or whether the project has you know, the project is consistent with the zoning action or whether the project was consistent with the general plan of the city. Supervisor ronen im sorry. Im a little confused. Ive been trying to work this out for a little while here. So is your argument to this exception to the Community Plan exemption option is irrelevant in a way because state law already requires state law requires this is consistent with the zoning . The zoning has to be consistent with the general plan. If its not consistent with the general plan or the zoning has to be consistent with the general plan. Thats a requirement of state law. The Planning Department found that this project was consistent with the zoning, which would mean that the project was consistent with the general plan because of that requirement. Supervisor ronen okay. Okay. But that doesnt speak to in any way, for example, that its going to create office space and not housing. Ms. Pearson im not sure i understand your question, supervisor. Supervisor ronen let me try to restate it. So when youre saying that the density is is consistent with the zoning, which is created by the zoning plan, it only matters that its consistent i know its confusing. Supervisor mandelman is looking at me, like, what are you talking about . Ms. Pearson well, there are different requirements that are listed in the zoning, but as long as those are consistent with the general plan or area plan, then it would be considered consistent. I would note that consistency is you know, consistency means the density of the proposed project is the same or less for the standard of the involved parcel in the general plan. Supervisor ronen okay. Let me try to clarify my questions. If i have other questions, ill come back to you. Sorry to be confusing. Thats all for me. President yee okay. Supervisor ronen, thank you. So next up with the for the the project sponsor or representative to present, and you have ten minutes. Good afternoon, supervisors. [inaudible] with reuben, junius, and rose, the project sponsors. I also have others on the line who are very familiar with the Community Outreach activities that have occurred over the last couple years, starting with the Community Meeting in 2017, and thereafter including nine meetings with united to save the mission, so if you have any questions of them, just please ask. I want to start by mentioning couple things regarding zoning which relates to the appellants key argument presented in his august 7 brief and today about the inconsistency or the alleged inconsistency with the Mission Area Plan. In 2009, with the adoption of the eastern neighborhoods plan, this site was rezoned from the prior m1 industrial zoning to the u. M. U. The u. M. U. Was created in 2009 as part of an extensive, years ago Long Community based planning process to create a buffer sedona allowing a mix of uses, which is also reflected in this property surrounding context, which including a variety of different kinds of uses, including John Oconnell school to the south, pg e yard to the north, and a mix of residential and commercial uses. There were some significant misunderstandings about the project itself during Public Comment that i want to correct a little bit. In addition to the legal three story Office Building, the other portion contains a surface parking lot. The project was created out of the desire to use the underutilized parking lot. The amount of new office use is 27,000 square feet, not 100,000 square feet, and only onethird of the project Square Footage is office Square Footage, which is fully compliant with the existing u. M. U. Zoning. The existing threestory Office Building will remain as it is today, and that office use was principle principally permitted under the prior m1 zones. No p. D. R. Used have existed at this site since the loma prieta earthquake, so this project does not eliminate or displace any p. D. R. Uses, it does not remove any existing houses, and the only use that will be eliminated by the project is a private surface parking lot, which in this city, as i can recall has never been a use that is worth saving if we can create some housing and other uses instead. The project absolutely is consistent with the Mission Area Plan that was adopted with the eastern neighborhoods process. Not only is it consistent with the plan as far as the objectives of policies in the Mission Area Plan, but it is also consistent within the meaning of seek i canceqa, whi slightly different definition. The mission plan includes a number of very different zoning districts, in addition to u. M. U. No project is ever going to satisfy every single one of the 43 objectives and 166 policies. The project, on balance, is absolutely consistent as its explained in detail in the Planning Commission approval motion. But today, the focus is ceqa, and from a ceqa perspective, consistency means that the density of the project as compared to the Community Plan for which the e. I. R. Was certified, and compliance with density related standards such as height, f. A. R. , number of communities, and so forth. No evidence have been submitted in the briefs or today as to how this project would be inconsistent with the density envisioned in the western neighborhoods e. I. R. Or how it would not comply with the neighborhoods zoning controls. It would comply and meets the definition as far as the ceqa zoning goes. This allowed for the sixth floor and the additional six units, and which, by the way, does not have any impact on the amount of office since two floors of office is permitted for a fivestory building, and this is five story without the state density bonus. The waivers and concessions are minimal, and in a nondensity bonus project, they would be reviewed as l. P. A. Exceptions and are fairly common in terms of l. P. A. Exceptions. The density bonus law provides that the granting of a density bonus concession by itself does not require a general plan amendment or zoning change. The sum of this is is that the use of the density bonus law does not require a project inconsistent with the Community Plan of zoning, and youve already held on another appeal at 1296 shotwell that a state density bonus project is eligible for c. P. E. So in addition to the argument about the inconsistency with the mission plan is that the neighborhood e. I. R. Is outdated and could not be used as a bas basis. However [inaudible] there have been several other appeals before this board where the board has upheld the use of c. P. E. S based on the use of neighborhood e. I. R. After finding that the project was consistent with the eastern neighborhood e. I. R. And would not result in new significant effects or effects of greater severity than were already analyzed in the eastern neighborhood e. I. R. , and one of those decisions was already confirmed by the superior court and the court of appeals. So when it comes to the environmental adequacy of the Environmental Review itself, substantial means enough information and reasonable inferences from which information that a fair argument can be made to support a conclusion, even though other conclusions might also be reached. The Planning Departments c. P. E. Determination satisfies the standard and was properly issued. So overall, the appeal before you today is similar to several other ceqa appeals that you have already decided on same points in the e. I. R. We ask you to deny the appeal and allow the project to proceed, with 24 residential units, including six b. M. R. Units, 2400 square feet of below market retail space, and a payment of over 3 million in impact fees. [inaudibl on your question, supervisor ronen on 15183, the Mission Neighborhood plan and eastern neighborhoods plan was created in response to a city general plan. The project definitely meets the definition of 15183, but happy to go any questions. And we want to thank you for your time, and our entire team is available for any questions. Thank you. President yee thank you. Are there any questions from my colleagues . All righty. Lets go into our next section, which is anybody on the roster. Ill invite members of the public in opposition to the appeal and in support of the project to move into the queue to speak. You have up to two minutes. Madam clerk, will you please call the first speaker. Clerk we have one caller in the queue, and we have 50 listeners. If you are interested, as the president said, press starthree. Okay, operations, lets unmute the first public caller. Welcome . Yeah. I guess i just want to say that we need the jobs, and people are overlooking how many jobs that is going to create and help in the mission, and yeah. You say coronavirus, but again, coronavirus, people need jobs. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operations, next caller, please. Hello, caller . Are you on the line . Hello . Clerk yes, we can hear you. Im sorry. I was on mute. [inaudible] Carpenters Union 3800 members which reside in this city of San Francisco to express our support for the project at 2300 harrison. Since the project was introduced in 2016, the team has done their Due Diligence and engaged in Extensive Community partners, and partners with the Carpenters Union to make certain that union trades are represented onsite. It meets all the goals and objectives set forth by the eastern neighborhoods plan, which will bring housing to the neighborhood, including six b. M. R. S and below market retail space. As well as hundreds of local union jobs for those in the trades and those looking to start a career in construction. San francisco will be faced with massive unemployment, budget shortfalls, and unemployment continues to rise to record levels. San franciscos current unemployment is 12 , just 2 shy of the state average. In closing, in a world of uncertainty, we need to continue to move forward on developments that are mutually beneficial for all parties, elevate homes by creating head of household careers, and pe e perpetuating platforms of kw l quality jobs. Clerk thank you. We are currently taking Public Comment in support of the project. Caller, are you on the line . Operator madam chair, that completes the queue. Clerk okay. Mr. President . President yee okay. Thank you for your comments. Are there and seeing that theres no other Public Comments, then this section of Public Comment is closed. Lastly, well invite the appellant to present a rebuttal argument. You have up to three minutes. Yes, sorry. Can you hear me . Clerk yes. Okay. Is my screen projecting, as well, again . It is. Okay. Thank you so much, supervisors, to everybody thats been calling in. I think i would like to layout the arguments since things seem to be getting confused. Density is the standard under 15183, subsection d, that standard is still not being met. Within the eastern neighborhoods plan, it was shown that this new development, u. M. U. Mixeduse districts, were intended to be a mixed use district. A Diverse Economic base be maintained by protecting our Service Sectors from being displacement by future Office Development. Within the Mission Area Plan, specifically aside from just the general u. M. U. , the Mission Industrial zone was created as a prime zoning area in the mission that would be productive in creating and protecting jobs. This project does not provide opportunities for latinos and latinas. What we have right now, planning has failed to count properly the density and the mixed uses and to properly regulate the office and amount of housing. We have seen the wholesale displacement of p. D. R. Were failing to maintain a diversity of economic opportunity. Were failing to maintain a mix of uses, were failing to protect t. D. R. , and planning is essentially saying that theres p. D. R. , and planning is essentially saying that theres not an oversaturation of Office Spaces in this u. M. U. Zone. We ask that they know that there is a sufficient mix of retail between offices, between p. D. R. , between cultural institutions. Cultural institutions and p. D. R. Have been the two biggest losses in the mission. Were failing to do our job. This negligence of the Planning Department does not save the project sponsor from the obligation. Finally, i wou finally, there is subevidence in the record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, that the lead agency may prepare an e. I. R. Said another way, if a project sponsor is presented with a way that there is an impact on the environment, that agency is to present an e. I. R. , even if its presented with other evidence that the project may not have substantial effects. And gentry versus murrieta states that an agency will not be able to hide behind its inability to gather the relevant data. Planning failed to gather the relevant data, and theres a reasonable possibility this is happening. Clerk okay. Thank you. President yee okay. This hearing is now filed. Excuse me. Supervisor ronen, before i file, did you have questions for the appellant . Supervisor ronen no, i think im clear. Thank you. Thank you, president yee, and to all the parties and Public Commenters who tuned in. You know, im always sorry to see a project come before the board on appeal. In this case, my office met both developer and appellant separately and together many, many times over the past several years. There were times when the parties were really close to an agreement, but fundamentally, the size and the type of office space were an insurmountable item to reach agreement. The Mission Area Plan stated that it was adding new controls that would limit new office and retail. Under the new urban mixed use zoning designation that was applied to many parcels in the northeast mission, including the one under discussion today, it added the possibility of adding a measure of mixed use. What it did not anticipate was the use of the state density bonus, which is intended to incentivize Affordable Housing to promote a project that was more than 70 office space. This does serve as a cautionary lesson. Before the project, the property was zoned for m1, Light Industrial. Under the new urban mixed use zoning, it would have allowed only one used. Instead, the two [inaudible] there was money to be made by locating tech offices in the mission, and the state density bonus offered a clever solution to getting the Office Projects they wanted. By offer to add a small number of residential units remember, this project has only 18 units plus six below market rate the project qualified for a state density bonus. They then took advantage of the requirements for the state density bonus, but instead of using them to create housing, they used it to create expansive offices. In addition, by creating this new project, it allows the office space which is nonconforming use, could ever be converted to p. D. R. Lets not kid ourselves. This site could certainly have accompanied or accommodated 110 residential units, and at that size, wed have 28 b. M. R. Units. Now that would have been a project worth approving. What the city needs more than anything, and what my District Needs isnt more office norm e nor more luxury homes, we need f more Affordable Housing in the mission. This was a plan that was intended to ensure, and i quote, that the mission would remain a center for immigrants, artists, and innovation, and would protect established areas of commercial, residential, and p. D. R. ; that areas would develop in such a way that they contribute positively to the neighborhood, a place for living and working in affordably placed housing, and an array of goods and services are oriented to serve the needs of the community, end quote. I have read all the documents, ive struggled with some of the arguments, and ive listened carefully today, and i appreciate the work of the Planning Department and both the project sponsors and the appellant. This is not the first time that members of our community have raised the issue that the eastern neighbors e. I. R. Is out of date. Weve discussed it here on appeals many times, and each time, with weve said that this time, weve said that thats not how ceqa works. However, the argument that the appellant is making this time is a little bit different. Specifically zshi im sorry. A piece of the appellants argument echos what i hear from my constituents. It pointed out that the Planning Departments map 2020 released last year, that since the 2010, the mission has lost 491,988 square feet of p. D. R. , close to 500 square feet of p. D. R. This is not trivial. These are Small Businesses, workshops, repairs, sewing factory, artists, all gone, while concurrently, Office Spaces have blossomed. It was not intended, and i dont think it was anticipated. To the point here, while were discussing environmental impact, it was not addressed in the c. P. E. The Mission Area Plan was intended to protect established areas of residential, commercial, and p. D. R. , so this explosive increase in office, and the concurrent loss of p. D. R. Really point to a major failure, and i have to assume that we did not anticipate this in the peir, and this project will take what is now 68,000 square feet of nonconforming e. I. R. And replace it with 98,000 square feet of office. In my opinion, the c. P. E. Absolutely does not articulate whether or not these changes could be considered substantial new information that was not considered in the peir. Therefore, based on the evidence that weve heard today and the missing attention to lost p. D. R. And the explosion of office space in the c. P. E. To this new and substantial information that was published in 2019, i move to table item 27, approve item 28, conditionally reversing the c. P. E. And approve item 29 and direct the clerk to prepare findings. Ill make that motion. President yee okay. So is there any other comments . Can i have a second . Supervisor walton second. President yee second from supervisor walton. Okay. So as previously discussed, we will take consideration of Community Plan evaluation, which supervisor ronen sort of did, which involves an analysis of whether a determination from the Planning Department on this project was appropriate, and to conditionally reverse Planning Commissions decision, six votes of the board are required. Supervisor ronen has made the motion, and its been seconded, and to a condition to reverse the Planning Departments decision related to the revised mitigation negative declaration, so approval your motion is to approve items 28 and 29 and table item 27. Supervisor ronen yes, table item 27 and approve items 28 and 29, yes. President yee i like to mix it up a little bit. Okay. Madam clerk, roll call. Clerk on the motion [roll call] clerk there are 11 ayes. President yee okay. Without objection, item 27 is tabled, and items 28 and 29 are approved. Colleagues, the Planning Departments decision related to determination of the Community Plan evaluation is found to be inadequate, and it is here by returned to the Planning Department. Madam clerk, lets go to our next 3 00 p. M. Special order. Please call items 33 through i mean, 30 through 33 together. Clerk items throu30 throu kpriez the appeal of determination of comprise the appeal of determination of exemption from Environmental Review, hearing of persons interested in or objects to the determination of exemption from Environmental Review under the California Environmental quality act issued as a categorical exemption by the Planning Department on april 8, 20 2019. Item 32 is the motion to reverse that determination subject to written findings by the board, and item 33 is the motion to direct the preparation of findings. President yee okay. I understand these items may be continued to a later date. Supervisor mandelman, do you have any comments . Supervisor mandelman supervisors, this is a project in delores heights to demolish an existing 4,000 square foot singlefamily home and build another 4,000 square foot singlefamily home. My office has been working these issues with applicant and appellant. Appellants, but i think our consideration of this would benefit from my Office Spending a little bit more time with abo them, and so ive been in touch with the clerks and president s office, and so i would like to continue these items to our september 22 meeting. President yee okay. Is there a second . Supervisor stefani second. President yee okay. Before we take the motion, lets take Public Comment on the continuance. Are there any members of the public who wish to speak on the anticipated continuance . Madam clerk . Clerk operations, do we have any callers in the queue. Ill just provide the telephone number very quickly. Its 4156550001. The meeting i. D. Is 1464274376. Press pound twice and then starthree if youre interested in making comments on the continuance. Operations, lets welcome the first caller. Hello, caller . Okay. This is Public Comment on the continuance . Oh, no, never mind. I was going to comment on everything else, but thank you, ill hang up. What an afternoon. Clerk or press starthree, and thatll put you back in the queue. Okay. Thank you. Clerk thank you. Operations, is there another caller . Operator madam clerk, that completes the queue. Clerk okay. Thank you. Mr. President . President yee okay. Seeing no other Public Comments on this item, then Public Comment is closed. [gavel]. President yee madam clerk, i guess we will take the motion to continue items 30 through 33 made by supervisor mandelman and seconded by supervisor fewer. Thank you please call the roll. Clerk on the continuance of 30 through 33 to september 29 [roll call] clerk there are 11 ayes. President yee okay. Without objection, then, items 30 to 33 will be continued to the meeting of tuesday, september 29, 2020. Madam clerk, lets go to Committee Reports. Please call the next item. Clerk okay. To Committee Reports, ill first state that items 34 through 36 were considered by the land use and Transportation Committee at a regular meeting on monday, august 17 and were considered as Committee Reports as follows. For item 34, this item was determined not to be forwarded to the board as a Committee Report, so it is not before the board today. Well move to item 35. Item 35 was recommended as a Committee Report. Its an emergency ordinance to temporarily prohibit Construction Projects in buildings with any Residential Rental units that require the suspension of water or Utility Service to residential tenants without providing alternative sources of water and power or reaching agreement with tenants due to the covid19 pandemic. Pursuant to charter section 2. 107, this matter requires the affirmative vote of two thirds of the board of supervisors or eight votes for passage on final reading. President yee supervisor peskin . Supervisor peskin thank you. I want to thank my cosponsors, supervisors ronen, walton, and preston. This is a commonsense ordinance that does not shutdown construction during the pandemic but really says at base that any contractor or Building Owner has to provide replacement water if they shutdown the water supply to an Apartment Building or replacement power if they have to shutdown the electricity over a specified number of hours, over a specified number of days, and i want to thank my staff, lee hepner, for all of this. President yee okay. Madam clerk, go ahead and call the roll. Clerk on item 35 [roll call] supervisor fewer and i also had signed up to be a cosponsor. Supervisor peskin my apologies, mr. President. Clerk there are 11 ayes, and supervisor fewer, we will check in there that you are a cosponsor. President yee the item passes unanimously. Madam clerk rngs next item. Clerk item 36 was not passed as a Committee Report. Item 37 was recommended as a Committee Report bearing the same title. Item 37 is a reenactment of an emergency soe emergency ordinance to temporarily require private employers with 500 or more employees to provide Public Health emergency leave during the Public Health emergency related to covid19. Pursuant to charter section 2. 107, this matter requires the affirmative vote of two thirds of the board of supervisors, or eight votes, for passage. Clerk president yee okay. Madam clerk, please call the roll. Clerk on item 37 [roll call] clerk there are 11 ayes. President yee without objection, the ordinance is finally passed unanimously. Madam clerk, lets go straight into roll call for introductions. Clerk okay. First to introduce new business is supervisor haney. Supervisor haney thank you, madam clerk. I have one ordinance and two resolutions. Today, im introducing legislation to close several selfoversight loopholes in city law, that allow certain leaders like mohamed nuru to oversee their own decisions over major contracts. Most departments fall under the oversight of citizen commissions, however, for the handful of departments where no oversight commissions currently exist, the mayor is mandated to play that critical oversight function. But unfortunately, there is a loophole in city law which creates a situation where we do not have a Healthy System of checks and balances, and there are 30 of these loopholes which create an opportunity for mayors to absolve themselves of Oversight Authority and place Unprecedented Authority in the hands of some department hands. Closure of the loopholes was part of the controllers office. The most egregious use of this loophole when late mayor lee opted to remove the Mayors Office from having joint Approval Authority over public works contracts, instead delegating Sole Authority to director nuru to approve contracts, essentially allowing nuru to oversee himself. This was one of the reasons why the controller identified that director nuru was able to handout contracts to friends or to pocketed connections. I want to underscore here that i dont believe former mayor lee did anything wrong here. This was something that was allowed under our law, but it created these consequences that we see here, and it is critical that we close this loophole. This will create the delegation of final and Sole Authority from being given to the director themselves, which is currently permitted in more than 30 different instances in city law. I want to thank mayor breed, who recently reversed the decision to give the director of public works sole governing authority, and as board of supervisors, it is incumbent on us to root out the very laws that enable fraud. I want to thank the controller for working with us and their recommendations on fighting fraud. Second, unfortunately, the San Francisco giants has refused to negotiate on supporting workers during this pandemic. Last week, hundreds protested outside of oracle park, and there were approximately 2,000 oracle park workers who have been locked out of their livelihoods due to covid19. Ballpark workers are overwhelmingly people of color, and many have serves fans for three or four decades. They are loyal members of the giants family, and they live and work here in San Francisco and deserve our support. The giants are worth 3. 1 pill i dont knpill million, and their owner is worth 4 billion. Meanwhile, oracle park workers are struggling to feed their families. Bill feliciano, who has worked for the giants since 1972, she said her and her fellow workers who are painly people of color mainly people of color have fought hard to be represented fairly, and it feels like its happening all over again. Two thirds of the workers at the ballpark are in the same terrible predicament. Wh i want to thank unite here local 2 for their partnership and for all of the ballpark workers. Lastly, im introducing a resolution in support of the make billionaires pay act. This was introduced by senator bernie sanders. Senator sanders legislation would establish a 60 tax on the gain billionaires made, and it would enable to pay for the medicare for all outofpocket expenses for 60 million americans. 467 billionaires have increased their health by approximately 731 billion. They are continuing to profit at the same time as so Many Americans are struggling and out of work. Somebody like je[inaudible] it has exposed a lot of inequities built into our economic system, and it has also put a burden on the health costs of working americans and americans who are out of work when they need it more than ever. I also want to note, and supervisor walton is a cosponsor of this resolution, as well as the prior one and hes going to speak to the resolution on the california wealth tax, by i think also addresses this issue at the state level, and we v as you know, an overpaid executive tax on the ballot this november. Clerk thank you, supervisor haney. Were you expecting supervisor walton to address this matter now or wait until you call on him . Supervisor haney no, i think when you call on him. Clerk okay. Thank you, supervisor haney. Supervisor mandelman . Supervisor mandelman thank you, madam clerk. Colleagues, i have three in memo memoriams today. Born on july 8, 1933 in north dakota, hadley moved to Washington State when i was nine years old. Therefore, he would earn his masters in social work in u. C. Berkeley. His husband, ward bateman served as director of Family Service agency, and they would remain together for nearly 60 years. Hadleys contribution to the advancement of aging services in San Francisco were numerous and transformative. He developed services for the elderly, including home delivered homes, congregate meals, and home and daycare. He was dedicated to uplifting the workers who made senior care possible. He created the nations first residential aids hospice, coming home hospice, which provided hospice for those with aids and other hospices. He remained active as an advisor [inaudible] he was a long time advisor and key figure in open house, serving on their board of directors from 2004 to 2017. [inaudible] in district 8, the citys first, although hopefully not for too much longer, the citys only lgbtq seniors Affordable Housing. His many contributions to our city have forever changed the lives of aging and lgbtq people, and for that, i want to express our eternal thanks. Rest in eternal peace, hadley hall. My second memoriam is for cheryl hall. She came to San Francisco in 1983 and met the love of her life, pam david, [inaudible] after pursuing many different careers, it was in San Francisco that she discovered her passion for real estate, eventually earning her real estate license. Cheryls love of life, her sense of human and her warmth all drew people to her, and she could also be demanding. When pam suggested they get married in october 2008, cheryl said she would if it included a party, a present in a light blue box, and that mayor newsom personal personally officiated. All conditions were personally met. We all miss her dearly, and may her memory be a blessing. And my final request is that we adjourn in memory of ronnie chapman. He was known to many as a gifted street artist, who made his home on a corner for many years, displaying a sign that said art for food. He developed an affinity for art at an early age. While serving a sixyear snl s sentence, he earned praise for his portraits of other incarcerated people. He helped found san quentins 2,000mile club, and helped form the san quentin marathon. He continued to run after his release from prison in 2009. Although he lived on the street for much of the 11 years following his release, ronnie ran up to ten miles a day, keeping his spirits high and focus sharp. Ronnie battled addiction for many years, but he had periods of sobriety. His art often featured free to follow. He said in a 2014 interview with the chronicle, he sold his works in hospitality house and haight and fillmore. In 2014, at age 53 and while living in an encampment under the freeway, ronnie fulfilled his dream of running in the San Francisco half marathon. He auctioned off one of his paintings that allowed him to pay for the marathon and give back to the Halfway House that helped him after he got out of prison. He helped out his neighbors and nearby Small Business owners, and he lived briefly in a basement of a rest Home Building before he returned to the street that was his home during his untimely passing. Shortly before his death, he was selected for a show with the museum of modern art. The show was set to open in april, but was delayed because of the pandemic, and sadly, ronnie wont be able to see his creations on display, but clearly, his bright light will continue to shine. Rest in peace, ronnie chapman. You will be missed. Clerk supervisor mar . Supervisor mar thank you, madam clerk. Colleagues, today, im introducing a resolution along with supervisor ronen urging the association of bay area governments, abag, in its up coming Regional Housing needs allocation, or rhna, to maintain their current housing level needs in San Francisco. The California Department of housing and Community Development recently assigned the bay area a new region wide rhna Housing Production goal that is 2. 35 times more than our existing one, or our goal of producing nearly 500,000 new homes in eight years throughout the bay area. San francisco should take a position on how the numbers will be allocated to local jurisdictions, as it will have a real impact on Speculative Development in our city if the goals are not met. If our housing goal is artificially too high, it will trigger s. B. 35. We know that socalled streamlining would further incentivize land and develop speculation, leading to displacement