Clerk mr. President , you have a quorum. President yee okay. Thank you. Please place your right hand over your heart. Would you please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance. [pledge of allegiance] okay. Thank you. On behalf of the meeting, i would like to acknowledge the staff at sfgtv who record our meetings and make the transcripts available to the public on time. Madam clerk, are there any communications . Clerk yes, mr. President. During this health crisis, the board of supervisors is meeting remotely and will proceed as though they were meeting in their public chamber. The board of supervisors realizes that public input is essential and more important during the time of covid19. So we hope that the public will take advantage of the following opportunities to participate in this meeting or comment remotely. If youre using the u. S. Mail, please address the envelope to the San Francisco board of supervisors, city hall, 1 carlton b. Goodlett place. Thats San Francisco, california, 94102. If sending via email, send to bos sfgovtv. Org. You can watch the proceedings on your television by utilizing channel 26. An important point is just to be aware of the signal delay, and when you are ready to provide your Public Comment, turn down your television and instead use your touch phone. You can listen to the proceedings and be in sync to provide your comment. The telephone number is 4156550001, and when prompted, enter the meeting i. D. Number. Thats 1467382415. Press pound, and pound again to join the meeting as a listener. To make Public Comment, press star, three, and listen to the prompt that your line has been unmuted. There are five separate public hearings. I wont review them all, but these items are noticed to begin no earlier than 3 00 p. M. , and Public Comment will be associated for each item. If your purpose is to provide testimony during general Public Comment, just wait for item 36 to be called, and you are able to speak on the minutes. I actually have that number incorrect, my apologies. It is general Public Comment, if youre waiting for that is apologies item 42. You are able to speak on items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the board not on todays agenda, and items 43 and 44 on the afford adoption without Committee Reference calendar. All other items on the agenda are not content eligible for your Public Comment. Okay. We do have interpreters present today. I would like each of them in succession to let the public know that youre here to assist them with Public Comment. [names read] [speaking cantonese language] [end of translation]. Interpreter thank you. [speaking spanish language] [end of translation]. [speaking tagalog language] interpreter thank you, madam clerk. Clerk thank you all for being here. So were working hard to not leave anybody out of the process. We have somebody standing by to help you with any problems you have at 4155545144. Thank you. President yee thank you, madam clerk. Just a friendly reminder to all my colleagues to mute your microphone so we dont have any feedback. I also want to let the public know that next week will be thanksgiving, which traditionally, for the last few years, any ways, we havent had a meeting on the tuesday before preceding thanksgiving. Unfortunately, for the public, you will not be able to hear us next week, and but we will be back the following week after that. And as already spoken by madam clerk, were still in a health crisis, and we should heed the recommendations of our public or Health Official to really, really limit or minimize the number of people that youre going to be interacting with during thanksgiving. Maybe virtually is best at this point. We are still spiking a little bit in San Francisco, and thats a warning for all of us, that its not over until its over, and we seem to have a little ways or a long ways before things are going to be over when it comes to really keeping your guards up or protecting yourself or your loved ones. So okay, then at this point, what id like to do, madam clerk, i understand i have received an accommodation request. Youre muted. Clerk apologies. Not today, mr. President. President yee okay. Then then what well do right now is go ahead and go to our consent agenda. Please call items 1 through 7 together. Clerk items 1 through 7 are on consent. These items are considers to be routine. If a member objects, an item may be removed and considered separately. President yee okay. Sorry. Madam clerk, go ahead and call the roll. Clerk on items 1 through 7 [roll call] clerk there are 11 ayes. President yee okay. Without objection, the ordinances are finally passed. Madam clerk, lets go to item 8, the next item. Clerk item 8 is a resolution authorizing the department of homelessness and Supportive Housing to execute a standard agreement and home key documenting for up to 30 million of home key grant funds from the California Department of housing and Community Development to Episcopal Community services for the acquisition of a 130room Tourist Hotel located at 440 geary street i apologize, mr. President. For use as proposed future permanent Supportive Housing, proving and authorizing h. S. H. To commit approximately 27. 4 million in city funds to satisfy local match and operational subsidy requirements for five years, to commence following board approval and upon the final award, and affirming the Planning Departments determination under the California Environmental quality act, department of homelessness and Supportive Housing. President yee okay. Supervisor peskin . Supervisor peskin yes, mr. Chair, i would like to be added as a cosponsor. President yee okay. Madam clerk, please call the roll. Clerk on item 8 [roll call] clerk there are 11 ayes. President yee all right. Without objection, the resolution is adopted. Madam clerk, lets go to the next item. Clerk item 9 is an ordinance amending the Building Code to require new construction to utilize only electric power, amending the environmental code to provide public hearings on implementation of allelectric requirements, adopting findings of local conditions under the California Health and safety code, and affirming the Planning Departments determination. President yee okay. Madam clerk, lets call the roll. Clerk on item 9 [roll call] clerk there are 11 ayes. President yee okay. Without objection, the ordinance is finally passed. Madam clerk, lets go to item number 10. Clerk item 10 is an ordinance to amend the administrative code to require notification to prequalified contractors and written documentation of contractor selection from prequalified lists and written documentation of contractor selection for work assigned under asneeded public works professional Services Contracts, and to require the controller to audit such selection documentation. President yee okay. Then supervisor stefani . Supervisor stefani thank you, president yee. Colleagues, the proposal before you will amend the administrative code [inaudible] that former director of public works mohamed nuru used to direct contracts to recipients without any documentation or oversight. That was drafted to respond to finding number four. It creates a new strict set of rules governing the use of prequalified contracting tools and as needed professional Services Contracts which Gave Department heads broad discretion to direct certain kinds of contracts to certain individuals and which were ripe for abuse. The city will be required to solicit these contracts publicly through a competitive solicitation, evaluate bids using consistent criteria, justify their selection, and retain the documentation for audit. According to the city auditor, the former director of punl works used those contractor tools to issue over 160 contracts totaling over 220 million over the last three years. Also, according to the city auditor, the previously director of public works would occasionally director contracts to the same vendor repeatedly with very little justification. This proposal means that any time one of these contracting vehicles is used, the other qualified vendors will be notified, and the department will have to document this justification for whom they selected. No matter what the amount, we will no longer be left wondering who got what contract and why. It is my hope that in responding to this process of corruption, we can instill a sense of trust of our government among our residents. I really want to thank my cosponsors, supervisor safai and the members of the g. A. O. Committee, as we heard this twice, supervisors peskin, haney, and mar, and also supervisor mandelman, for your cosponsorship, as well. I ask for your support. Thank you. President yee madam clerk, roll call, please. Clerk okay. On item 10 [roll call] clerk there are 11 ayes. President yee okay. Without objection, the ordinance is passed on First Reading. Okay. Madam clerk, why dont we go ahead and please call items 1 not 1 11 through 18 together. Clerk items 11 through 18 are ordinances that adopt and implement various memorandum of understanding or m. O. U. S between the city and various locals. Item 11 is ordinance adopting and implementing the Second Amendment to the 20182021 memorandum of understanding between the city and county of San Francisco and the San Francisco Firefighters Association local 798, unit 1, to defer wage increases currently set for fiscal year 20202021, extend the term by two years and set wages for the additional term. Item 12 is the ordinance adopting and implementing the third amendment to the 2018 through 2021 m. O. U. Between the city and the San Francisco Firefighters Association to defer wage increases. Item 13 is an ordinance adopting and implementing the First Amendment to the 20192022 m. O. U. Between the city and county and the municipal executives association, toup date the grievance procedures. Item 14 is an ordinance adopting and implementing the First Amendment to the 20182021 m. O. U. Between the city and county and the municipal executives association, fire, to defer wage increase does currently set for fiscal year 20202021, extend the term by two years, and set wages for the additional term. Item 15 is an ordinance adopting and implementing the First Amendment to the 20182021 m. O. U. Between the city and county and the municipal executives association, police. Item 16 is an ordinance adopting and impummenting the Second Amendment to the 20192022 m. O. U. Between the city and county and seiu to update the work study provisions. Item 17 is an ordinance adopting and implementing the First Amendment to the 20192022 m. O. U. Between the city and county and the seiu local 1021 staff and per diem nurses, to make administrative amendments to the overtime provisions. Item 18 is an ordinance amending ordinance number 10620 fixing compensation for persons employed by the city and county whose compensation is subject to the provisions of section a8. 409 of the charter, in job codes not represented by an employee organization, and establishing working schedules. President yee okay. Madam clerk, please call the roll. Clerk on items 11 through 18 [roll call] president ye clerk mr. President , you have 11 ayes. President yee okay. The items are passed on First Reading. Madam clerk, call item 19. Clerk item 19 is an ordinance adopting and implementing the tentative agreement between the city and county and the San Francisco Police Officers association including adopting and implementing the first amend to the 20182021 m. O. U. Between the city and p. O. A. , to defer wage increases currently set for fiscal year 20202021, amend the retention premium provisions, amend the 10b overtime provisions, extend the term by two years, and set wages for the additional term, and approving settlement of two grievances file by the p. O. A. Against the city for a not to exceed amount of 359,613. 87, the grievances were filed on march 25, 2020 and june 29, 2020, and involve compensation disputes under the m. O. U. President yee okay. Supervisor ronen . Supervisor ronen the reason i will be voting against approval today is because the department of Human Resources failed to achieve even minor agreements to Police Reform, one of the most important issues of our time. I find d. H. R. S procedure on negotiating for reform on the p. O. A. S m. O. U. Quite trouble willing. Carolyn eisen said when the board directed her to negotiate this, she attempted it under duress. Combine that with d. H. R. S insistence on holding meetandconfers in my insistence that are wholly within the managements prerogative, and i have a major difference of opinion with d. H. R. On the appropriate scope of its work. I have such a difference of opinion with d. H. R. Here that today, i announce legislation to create transparency over the closed door negotiations between d. H. R. And the p. O. A. In the future. I want to be clear about some of the reforms that could have been included as Side Agreements in this m. O. U. As you all know, a major component of Mental Health s. F. That supervisor haney and i authored includes the creation of teams of Health Professionals that will answer calls in occasions of people in Mental Health distress instead of the police. Since interim director miss eisen doesnt believe in including these items in discussion, we have lost an important opportunity. For all we know, the p. O. A. Could have decided to deny an agreement, denying the process to moving this process of Mental Health s. F. Forward. We could have had a plan where the p. O. A. Had a plan to address the persistent Racial Disparities or use of force or a si and the list goes on and on and on. Remember that the d. O. J. Had 272 recommendations for reform, and we have only reached substantial compliance on a fraction of those recommendations. Why would we lose this golden opportunity to make significant progress on reform . Giving up this opportunity makes no sense to me, and for that reason, i cannot support the m. O. U. Before us today. I will say that no matter what happens with this vote today, i know that there is significant consensus among us, elected officials, community activists, organized labor, and allies, that much more needs to be done to make our communities safer, and i remain committed to working in a Broad Coalition to identifying and using every possible tool in our disposal to advance Racial Justice in policing. Thank you for hearing me out, and sorry that i cannot support this m. O. U. Today. President yee supervisor preston . Supervisor preston thank you, president yee, and i would like to associate myself with the remarks supervisor ronen just made. I share many of the concerns that have been raised. I did want you know, one of the things that has come up in discussions is is certainly the and this is all second and thirdhand because none of us are at the table and an issue being addressed separately by legislation as supervisor ronen announced earlier today. But i did want to get on the record one of the things that we have heard repeatedly in considering this m. O. U. , and and that is and president yee, i dont know the appropriate whether it is acting director eisen or another representative of the mayor who, through the president , would be able to answer this. But the the claim has repeatedly been made publicly and in media that to reject this m. O. U. For the police would result in nonpolice workers, city workers being laid off, and i would like to know if that is the position of the mayor or of d. H. R. As we consider how were voting on this. President yee so sofia, are you y you sophia, maybe thats a question for you. Are you with us . Yes. So i would first defer to director eisen, and then, i would tag in after she speaks. President yee okay. Director eisen . That is not my position, that a rejection of this contract would result in layoffs of City Employees. President yee okay. And miss fitsler . Thank you, president yee. I had to get my camera on. Apologize for the delay. I think that is not the position of the mayor, either. Certainly, we have said that resulting in the additional fiscal impacts of not passing this m. O. U. Would require that the mayor, again, look at a number of financial choices, one of which could include potential layoffs, but certainly, i would not direct line between this m. O. U. And layoffs of any workers, police or otherwise. It is it is a policy choice that remains before the mayor. President yee supervisor preston, go ahead . Supervisor preston yes, thank you, president yee, and, mr. President , just to follow up with miss kipler, is the thre thre the threat to layoff city workers, is that gaining force in the m. O. U. . Not to my knowledge, supervisor. Supervisor preston thank you, and thank you for clearing the air on that, i think its important because i think we all, and certainly this board stands with our city workers during this time, and just make sure these two things are not being conflated. Some comments. I think we are presented with an m. O. U. That, as supervisor ronen has laid out, failed to include any concessions on reform, so nothing that addresses the p. O. A. S unrelenting history of delaying reform, including the 270 recommendations from d. O. J. It leaves fully intact the primary tool that the b. O. A. Has used to obstruct change, and thats misuse of the meetandconfer process by which the p. O. A. Can delay or threaten to delay any changes to Police Policies and practices. The m. O. U. Has been negotiated behind closed doors entirely by the mayors team, a process that i think is problematic and look forward to working with you, colleagues and supervisor ronen in trying to change that process. The board of supervisors is not meaningfully involved. Not sure to the extent to which the police chief is certainly involved. Police reform experts have been excluded, and so the entire process of negotiation from the mayors d. H. R. Unilaterally behind closed doors often negotiating an m. O. U. , that i think does reward and perpetuate the status quo. And i think that the position that these reforms are wholly unrelated to Contract Negotiation is one that i think strategically is mistaken. I think this is one of the few opportunities where there is actually leverage to asset and to try to win reforms either as part of a contract or as a Side Agreement, and i think this is really contrary to the national increasingly consensus around how contract talks with and negotiations with Police Unions should be handled if we are serious about reimagining policing in this country and in this city. Other cities and i wont go into the details, but certainly, chicago, cincinnati, baltimore, philadelphia, washington, d. C. , have all been grappling with this, and to a much greater extent, their legislative bodies and policy makers have brought the reform discussions into the context of Contract Negotiations. So why is it in this moment that the that the city is only addressing the Economic Issues in a deal that locks in the same problematic contract language weve seen time and time again, especially during this time when we have national calls and demands for real change . I also while i appreciate the clarification between the lack of connection between this and city workers, i think its been no secret, certainly in city hall and stated at hearings publicly, that everyone fall in line behind this weak m. O. U. It is perhaps a change of course, what were hearing today, but certainly for weeks, weve been hearing threats from the administration to lay off or cut salaries of city workers if this m. O. U. Is not approved. Im glad to hear the air cleared on that, but its still very concerning to try to gain support for this through those kind of scare tactics. So the drive to really reward the police for adhering to the status quo, you know, that that would be done you know, with such strength as to actually be threatening muni operators, health care workers, other City Employees, our essential workers with loss of their livelihoods in this time is not something i take lightly. Its something ive been shocked to hear over the last few weeks if not months. This is a time when we need our city workers, and they need us more than ever. I just want to be clear, before i wrap up, i think speeches calling for Police Reform are extremely important. I think rhetoric matters, and i appreciate how all of our leaders have come together, but i do think actions speak louder than words. And i think if were serious about reforming this department, thats not going to happen if d. H. R. And the mayor continues to offer more pay raises to the p. O. A. Without something for anything more significant than reforms or future wage concessions. We did this before, annual wage increase of 3 , and here we are, about to do it again, depending on this vote. I think there is not significant incentive for p. O. A. To change. I think we need to use the leverage we have right now. I will recognize that colleagues are in a difficult position where the process does not allow us to amend. I can say, without speaking for colleagues, that if we could amend this contract as a board of supervisors, my guess is wed have, if not an 110 vote, something very close to that to put this in here. Its an upordown vote, and i just cant i just find it stunning in this moment that that we would approve a contract seemingly unaffected by the events of over the last year and in opposition to what experts across the country are telling us we should be doing in negotiating with the p. O. A. And in insisting on Greater Transparency and public input and the reforms that we all know are so desperately needed. So i will be joining supervisor ronen in voting against the m. O. U. , and i think it is important that the negotiations go back to the drawing board. Thank you. President yee supervisor peskin . Supervisor peskin thank you, president yee, and i appreciate the comments and observations and positions of our two colleagues who have previously spoken. And i think there is unanimous agreement on this board and in our society and in this city as it applies to reforming the police and our people and the p. O. A. In this town and across america. And certainly, there are budgetary implications. We all knew that when we voted on the budget a couple of months ago, and we all knew that that had implications for the metoo clause in the Firefighters Local 798 in the contract. But lets put that aside, and lets try to focus on the issue of our day and our time, and thats reform. I have to say as somebody who was on this board when chris cunney ran the p. O. A. , and ran it for the worst, who bullied, who intimidated, who behaved like a thug, i was here for that period of time, and i have been around long enough to see the current executive board of the p. O. A. But personalities aside, i think part of what we need to grapple with is what level of change is happening, whether its connected to the contract discussion were having or whether its connected to the murder of george floyd or whether its connected to a new p. O. A. Leadership. And i i want to start by and one of the things thats been kind of opaque in this discussion, and i say that as a member of the government audit and Oversight Committee , and theres been very little said by the Police Department, and nothing has been said by the p. O. A. Itself. We all know that, for quite a long period of time, meetandconfer which, by the way, is not a contractual matter, it is a matter that is set forth in law, in myers milius brown is used to jam anything through, anything that this police chief and his command staff and the Police Commission, most importantly, were changing to change. Its my understanding in the last number of month, eight s,f them, to be exact, that method has changed substantially. And if you would indulge me, mr. President , i would like to hear from the Police Chiefs mouth what reforms hes trying to deliver pursuant to the commissions actions, pursuant to his own d. G. O. S. And with that, mr. President , id like to hear from chief scott. President yee okay. Chief scott, are you on . Yes, president yee, im on. Thank you. President yee okay. Would you like to take the opportunity to respond . Yes, sir, thank you. First, let me start by saying i and the department appreciate everyones interest in moving reform forward, and this, despite which side of the boat youre on, its not my decision to try to change anyones position or vote. But i and the department really does appreciate everybodys interest in pushing reform forward because its in the best interests of Public Safety and our Police Department, so thank you all for that. To supervisors preston sorry peskins points just now or comments just now, i think i can offer a point of view from my view where we are in terms of the p. O. A. And the San Francisco Police Department moving forward to do just what everybody wants, including us, and that is drive reform. Im not going to sit here and say there have not been delays in the past. You know because there have. But i think where we are now, we are in a really good place, in my opinion. We have moved a significant amount of the reform recommendations forward this year. Weve moved a significant amount of policy forward this year, and some of those thats been pointed out have dealt with meetandconfer issues, but weve made some steps also, and i think the p. O. A. Has made some steps in my opinion to work out some of the things that have caused some delay in the past. And some examples of major reform and policies that have gone through this year are policy prohibiting discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, which is our d. G. O. 11. 07. That actually got through its whole policy Development Process and the meetandconfer, and after a couple of months, was actually through meetandconfer and to the Police Commission for aful praful for approval. That method took approximately four months. Our bias free policing policy, which has a number of reforms tied to that particular policy, also, similar scenario this year. Went to meetandconfer in may, and by august, it was adopted by the Police Commission. So the point to this part of my comments is this i think moving forward, were in a really good rhythm, and the relationship, the working relationship, as far as reform goes with the Police Officers association has been pretty good. And looking forward, im optimistic that that will continue going forward. As far as myself, the Staff Members and myself sit down each month specifically to move this agenda forward. And those meetings in conjunction with the progress that weve made has really exponentially increased the rate of which the reform recommendations have been found in substantial compliance this year. This time last year, after two years of our engagement with almost two years, or 1. 5 years of engagement with the California Department of justice, we only had about 40 that were completed and in substantial compliance. As of this morning, we have 94 in substantial compliance. We have another 49 that are in review from the california d. O. J. That we believe are within, probably by end of the year, will be found in substantial compliance because of the systems and the processes that we put in place. The ones that have gone to review for them for the last four months have all been found in substantial compliance. So were positive that will continue, partially because of the relationship that weve developed with the Police Officers association. I will tell you that we have a very aggressive agenda in terms of what we will meet in the next six months in terms of reform. We have a Business Plan of recommendations that we believe well complete, and within that time or the next four months, actually, we believe we will be in the 230 range in terms of completed recommendations, and i think that is a step in the right direction a major step in the right direction that could not happen without the working relationship that i mentioned being being what it has evolved to as to this point. Again, there are going to be things that we still have to work out, and i do think we are in a really good place. I will just close out my comments by saying ive seen a change, ive seen a difference, and as you know, i was as frustrated as you with the pace of our reform initiatives, and we have picked up the pace to where this is functional, and i think im optimistic about the picture. President yee thank you, chief. Supervisor peskin and mr. President , if i may, through the president , to chief scott, to what do you attribute this change . Because you expressed your frustration i, too, note that this seems to be a change. Is that a result of the George Floyd Protests across america . Is that, as i indicated in committee, the p. O. A. Retained mor more scenentient counsel president yee well, before we get into this, before you answer, chief, maybe its because we passed prop e okay, chief. Well, supervisor peskin, a couple of things have happened. I think there, of course, have been changes in leadership on the p. O. A. S end. There have been process improvements both internally, and i cant speak to whats happening internally with the Police Officers association, but i can say theres been a change in leadership, theres been a change in terms of counsel in emergency roterms o issues, and i think the working relationship with current leadership, our command staff, which has turned over in the last couple of years, have moves us in a positive moved us in a positive direction. Supervisor peskin of the command staff, as well as other laws, etc. So is that commonplace . I mean, ive searched the entire contract. I can find three references in the entire contract as it relates to issues of additi discipline, reprimand. Is that commonplace . President yee chief . Supervisor peskin, can say, my professional opinion, i think discipline, in approximate our case, the longer in the hands of either the commission or a higher level of discipline or management, or police chief, or those in this city or county that are below a tenday suspension, i think that is a functional way. I think that is what is considered a best practice in terms of modelling. You are starting to see more and more departments to go to that type of modelling, oversight, civilian oversight with commissions, and its its been said by academic researchers to be a very good model, so i think that discipline is not in the contract purposely because it belonged in the hands of the oversight body or the managers that manage the department. Supervisor peskin thank you, chief, and i do have to say as a cosponsor of then president of the board tom ammianos proposition h, that led to a complete change in the way the Police Commission is appointed and the approval authorities of legislative branch, this board of supervisors, i hear you, and i think as a matter of governance, concur with you. But i wanted to switch gears for just a second and go to something that supervisor preston said about rhetoric, about words, whether they are uttered or whether they are written do matter. Yeah, there are concerning articles and rhetoric sometimes in general. Supervisor peskin and i imagine you, as the police chief, and myself and my ten colleagues all get a courtesy copy of that in the mail whether we want it or not. I do. Supervisor peskin and i do whether or not i want it. It comes to my house. Do you believe the tone and tenor of that publication has gotten better and become more sentient in the last eight months . I think its getting better, yes. I think theres still work to do, but i think its getting better. And again, you asked in terms of words mattering. This is a National Conversation with many people across the country that are want to see some balance of, you know, the the the leverage of collective bargaining units as it relates to reform and policing in this country, so words matter a lot because thats what people react to. [please stand by] hopefully turning a new page. We have Charter Amendments to pass in 2022 and we have the transparency ordinance thats coming but i want it had hear from the president of the p. O. A. And whats the question . Pursuant so the questions im asking for what i think in many instances while its certainly right which most have gone away under your presidency and your new attorney but i wanted to hear your position on those things. Can you hear me . Good afternoon. Can you hear me . Yes. I have a prepared statement. Would i be able to read that or do you want me to jump in the question asked . If its relevant to the question this is not a hearing and it can be more closely affiliated with the condition contract itself and i think you should just answer the question. Some pointed out in the todays meeting that yes, earlier this year as part of my getting reelected to a full term president i made significant changes at the p. O. A. One was hiring new general counsel. We hired the firm back in march of this year and i believe weve made tremendous headway in the last 18 months as far as clearing up the backlog of some items that were lingering out there for quite a while. Like i said the momentum continues to move forward and something im proud of in that decision. Im optimistic well continue to get things done in an efficient manner at the same time making sure our members rights are protected. And i wouldnt mind hearing president montoyas statement. Are you finished . I dont want to overstay my welcome by reading the question but i propose this question which is mr. Montoya do you believe under your leadership the San Francisco p. O. A. Is committed to the kind of Police Reform that chief scott and his commission is pushing, the board has held numerous hearings on set forth in the d. O. J. s recommendations and findings. Can you address, that, please. Early on and what brought a National Spotlight to the tension was the unnecessary killing of george floyd plin minneapolis. The p. O. A. Was one of the first to get out in front of that and condemn those actions. That spark the conversation. The p. O. A. s made it very clear to my leadership were ready to roll up our sleeves and we have many new policies to address and we are willing to continue to work with all the stakeholders. We made it very clear to the Police Commission and i made it clear to the Police Department. Theres unfortunately been delays long didnt along the way due to the process and theres no objection to the recommendation. Were willing to signed off on many of them tomorrow if its put before us to do that. Thank you, mr. President. Thank you, mr. Montoya. Supervisor ronen. Thank you president yee. Thank you mr. Montoya for being here. You state have you no objections to many of the 272 recommendations in this. Was there Side Agreement about reform measures in your negotiations with d. H. R. . No, maam, that never came up during the discussions. Supervisor but had it come up would that have been something the p. O. A. Would have been willing to negotiate around potentially add as a Side Agreement to the contract . Thats something we rely our attorney or legal advice on that and as director pointed out in the past, back in 2018 for the counter m. O. U. , the arbitrator ruled that that type of language didnt belong in the m. O. U. It was a separate process wen the Police Department and the association. A lot of those recommendations are management prerogative. They would not meet and confer. Many are being implemented in new policy being developed. Like i said, i cannot state enough the p. O. A. s willing to sit down today, tomorrow, next week and work with the department on making sure to move the reforms forward as quickly as possible. Supervisor i watched the g. A. O. Hearing and you made clear you dont believe a contract is an appropriate venue to negotiate in any way shape or form around reform. Is that correct . I couldnt characterize it that way supervisor. Happy to repeat the portion of the testimony that i think youre getting at. Actually, i wrote it down word for word. Maybe i misunderstood it but let me read it back to you. We have quite intentionally not encouraged or allowed those policy considerations to blend into the Labor Agreements. Because once something ends up in a Labor Agreement it becomes set policy terms that can last for a long time and create an imflex inflexibility that doesnt allow the city to change and those are vest with the Police Commission and you later said in 2018 when this board gave you the direction to negotiate around reform but you did so under duress. What am i not understanding here . The first comments i think they speak for themselves and i can explain them again as needed but the way were set up in the city is the policy making for the Police Department is vested in the two Police Commissions. Over many years and including since the adoption of a590 in the early 1990s the department made sure policy matters and those matters that would bleed into collective bargaining do not end up in the m. O. U. For executive reasons i stated and you read back. Theyre handled by the Police Commission. The Police Commission has an obligation to meet and confer over matters within the scope that do that and the department now has its own resource to do so and delegated to do that work. Were those matters to end up in a Labor Agreement, they would then if history is any guide, would remain in the Labor Agreement as the Police Commission would not be able to make necessary amendments to policy very easily because theyd be compelled by the language in the Labor Agreement. Thats my first comment. I can respond to the second one as well. Supervisor thank you, president yee. Im sorry, what would be the problem . First of all, Labor Agreements last usually a couple of years before theyre up for negotiation again. And what would be the problem for example in the case of the essential Mental Health at best that we are trying to implement this moment having a signed agreement with the p. O. A. Would agree that they agree that certain work should be transferred over to d. P. H. And that theres no need to have any further discussion about it because remember around prop e there was some conflict about any potential removal of mandatory minimums of police and why you impacted working conditions. You had a whole process for meet and confer that never ended up and ended up in litigation, etcetera, etcetera. Wouldnt it have been a smarter idea to have a Side Agreement we just heard from tony montoya they have no objections to the majority of the 272 recommendations. One of those recommendations does involve medical professionals responding to calls of people in Mental Health crisis. What is your objection . I dont understand it at all to having a Side Agreement where the p. O. A. Agrees to it and were done. We can move forward with our street crisis teams and get them up and running and get the hallmarks the most important part underway. Why cant we have that in the Side Agreement. How does that limit the Police Commissions ability to make any changes. Im really not following you. Were saying two Different Things, supervisor. I will say first of all i have no objection to what youre talking about. Of course that is a very good idea and i understand discussions have already taken place between the Police Department and the union over that very issue. Of course the p. O. A. s stated publicly in the newspaper i read the same comments you did that if the board and supervisors and mayor wishes to reorganize how sweep calls are done the p. O. A. Say willing partner in that discussion so i dont see a problem with that but that is not what i was addressing. What i was addressing are the matters of policy that are under the purview of the Police Commission such as the use of force. The body worn cameras, the various issues under the Police Commission and theyre in a generational rewrite of those d. G. O. S and the department of the d. G. O. s recommendations have been a part of that. As theyre making policy and adopting the policies they enter into a meet and confer process. They make the changes as necessary, they arrive at an agreement. If the Police Commission then seeks a further change to the policy, they can do that. Theyre not constrained by the m. O. U. , per se. Which is fixed and once a matter in the m. O. U. Becomes difficult to get out. The p. O. A. s m. O. U. Speaks to wages, benefits, it speaks to bidding on shift and assignments. It does not speak to the issues youre talking about and it would be perfectly acceptable to enter into a letter of agreement with the p. O. A. The things youre saying and i dont know why we would condition wages on it. The way police wages are set in the city is by the labor market conditions. Those are the criteria in our charter. It talks about what we pay people internally and what people are paid externally in the labor market. Thats the basic criteria used for wage setting. Its done before collective bargaining and after. We were asked to delay wage increases to assist with the financial problem that was laid out in the march joint report. We went with Union Partners and made that agreement and i to support the comments of the chief i have seen a mark change in the approach of this administration and the Police Officers association it may not be perfect or everything we want and the newsletter may still say objectionable things i dont agree with but i support your Mental Health Charter Amendment and think we did a good job there and there was no litigation because we spent so much time talking to the unions. Similar with supervisor yees amendment the minimum staffing and i personally did both of those tables. And i conferred with both unions because we spent the time doing and that heard from the p. O. A. They have no inherent objection to reorganization of how street calls are answered and i look forward to participating in that discussion with you and all of our labor partners including the p. O. A. To come up with workable funded solutions we can all support. I would be a willing partner with every member of this board of supervisors with whose approach and ideas i support and professionally in personally agree with. Supervisor supervisor ronen. Supervisor this this undertaking as chief scott can tell you is so large to reenvision, reimagine and redo the way we do policing so that the killing of the black and brown people so that the racially biassed policing so the scandals that have come out of the Police Department over the years never happen again. And to just take the position that your going to renegotiate the contract without taking into consideration any of this. Its quite frankly shocking to me. And the irony of it all at this point the transparency legislation that im talking about is more focussed on knowing and understanding what d. H. R. Is doing more than even the p. O. A. I feel in the dark as an elected leader can possibly feel and incredibly disappointed for the m. O. A. Brought to us today. And with that i will close. Supervisor supervisor fewer. Supervisor i appreciate the turning of a new leaf i think a lot of it has been pushed because you [technical difficulties] and your board member admittedly says to the president i threatened to shut her up and that is me. And mr. Montoya, i have not heard from you and whether its something you condone or applaud to get what you at the p. O. A. Want. I think its an opportune time to ask you before i cast my vote on this contract, is this something youre proud of the p. O. A. They threaten, quite frankly, a public official and her capacity to do her job as an elected side for constituents. Supervisor mr. Montoya. Supervisor few are, fewer, let me be clear, i condemn the actions youre talking about. At the time that occurred, that person was not they were sitting on the executive board. Lets be clear, youre probably talking about jerry delanus. Supervisor lets be clear, many on your executive board was completely aware of the correspondence as they were ccd. I took incredible corrective action and he is no longer employed with the association. His own connection with us is hes a retired member like all retired Police Officers are eligible to do. That with some other things we broke ties with him as a consultant and in doing so i have taken the p. O. A. There were growing pains but i do believe weve made significant streets and we made significant changes and making sure this has passed. And aside from the agreement before you today, we met with representatives from the Police Department and department of Human Resources and agreed to approximately 20 or 30 calls for service. And i would sign off on this tomorrow. We agreed who a whole list of calls to be handled by police. We felt they are better handled by other professionals. Supervisor thank you, mr. Montoya. On behalf of your organization are you prepared to apologize for your executive board threatening me and my family . Like i said i condemn supervisor its a question, mr. Montoya. Are you here to apologize for the behavior the past behavior, which you do not condone of your executive board threatening a public official. Whether or not youre prepared to apologize for the behavior as the president of the association. Like i said that is a past administration. Supervisor thats a yes or no answer, mr. Montoya. If it please the supervisor i apologize for the past action of a past consultant that threatened the supervisor and her family. Supervisor thank you, mr. Montoya. Thank you, mr. Yee. Thank you, president yee. This is one of those times where we have to make a difficult decision and the decision has taken a very long time for me to reach. As a black man impacted by racist institutions, i want to share our recent decision how i feel that we dont really have another option. If today we dont approve the p. O. A. Contract we will have to find millions of dollars this year and next year. Thats not a fact or ifs, ands or buts about it and not created. This decision will force cuts to be made. It is important for supervisors do not determine that. That is determined by [indiscernible]. As much as i dont want to approve this m. O. U. Negotiated by the Mayors Office theres a few things i need to make clear. If we dont approve this contract today, it goes back to the Police Department automatically they get raises and create a budget hole of millions of dollars. At the board of supervisors we will have no say in where those resources come from when that whole hole is created. Therefore well be setting up hundreds of employees for layoffs. Hundreds. Who will suffer most from the layoffs . Black, browns, people of color all races an ethnicities and i believe the administration when they said they were lazy. I know a represent of the mayor spoke today. I do not trust that all of a sudden in the hearing the Mayors Office is going to back away from layoffs if dont approve the contract of the millions of dollars. I do not trust that. Im not going to [indiscernible]. Especially during this covid19 pandemic when jobs are scarce and health care is essential. As a black man im also not going let a whole bunch of people who dont look like me tell me [indiscernible] the p. O. A. Has made cartoons with my face. The misogynistic p. O. A. Has made cartoons that made me and other members of this board of supervisors. I continue to receive hate male just for being hate mail just for being a black male on the board of supervisors and for those who reached out today and staff to say that [indiscernible] affects them in a negative way we dont approve this. I 150 truly believe the Mayors Office [indiscernible]. Theres no way in the world i could support having that on my conscience. We have to preserve jobs particularly in this pandemic and we have to make sure that we do everything we can to keep people working. Secondly, if we do not approve this m. O. U. And we have to go to arbitration, im afraid that the s. F. P. D. Will receive bigger raises because arbitrators will not take into account the 272 recommendations of the department of justice. They wont take into account the fact that bargaining and compensation should be tied to the Police Reform we all know is important and we all should seek and i 100 believe arbitrators look at the economics of the region and possibly provide bigger wage increases than the ones that have been postponed or proposed today. Now, i know theres people out there who think we would fare better through arbitration. I dont. Im not going to gamble with the appreciation resources that are needed to serve our city. Im committed of course to push, fight, kick, do what i need to for those recommendations to be achieved. Most important to me at this particular time as the only black person on the board of supervisors is that we were able to approve a budget that redirected 120 million of resources from sfpd to invest in the black community. Our community, my community, i cannot jeopardize that after all of our hard work together. The black community has [indiscernible] and we owe this to the black community and make sure the threat of proposed cuts dont potentially impact this investment. This is something i cannot do under any type of pressure. Investing in the black community is long overdue and a step in the right direction to bring the black community to funding parity. Earlier today we this year we introduced reparations and well ensure over criminalization and misconduct from police is a part of what is called for and we passed the karen act for individuals who like to use enforcement to harm people of color. We made National Attention by passing an ordinance to close our youth juvenile guidance by december 2021. And together we demanded and voted for sheriff oversight, proposition d this past november election so no Law Enforcement body goes unchecked and gets away with Excessive Force and misconduct. Make no mistake about it, this years board has made several and pushed for several reforms and justice. That will change Law Enforcement in San Francisco forever. Together we remain committed to just tis. Justice. The one thing i want to state because really what we have here in my opinion as a board is a difference of what we actually think will happen if certain decisions get made. And i for one believes when someone shows you who they are, i believe it. They said theyre laying people off and i will say that the administration has showed us that they will push people out of shelter in place hotels during the middle of a pandemic so when they say theyll lay people off, i believe theyll lay people off. Whats best for preserving hundreds of jobs is to make sure we dont create a deficit for the city and county of San Francisco after we already had an improved i do not bother asking you present before the board of supervisors today. Thank you, president yee. Supervisor thank you, supervisor haney. I wont say too much because we had a long hearing about this in the committee and i appreciate and agree with much of what has been said already. I do want to echo a point from supervisor walton that he just made which is despite what we heard from the Mayors Office today, we have heard from our labor partners, our nurses, our health care workers, our muni operators and librarians who have said that again and again they have been threatened with layoffs if we do not approve this m. O. U. That has been their experience. Thats what they heard directly from the mayor and for now for us to hear Something Different contradicts what theyve been told directly. We are in a position right now where if we reject this m. O. U. , we are going to create an over 10 million hole in our budget. We had heard from our city workers who have sacrificed tremendously during this pandemic that they believe this will lead to layoffs and direct cuts and attacks on them and our city workers. I think for us to stand in solidarity with them and focus on them and what is right for our city moving forward is what is of top of mind for me. I also want to say that the work that needs to get done on reform can be done through management prerogative via our chief. Through the policies that can be adopted by the Police Commission through this board with legislation which was introduced by supervisor ronen and others and we have to act more decisively and aggressively on reform and we can do that within the tools we have. So i hope that you heard that as well, president montoya, well be expecting that you accept these reforms and partner with us on these reforms because our residents are demanding them. Well use every tool at our disposal to ensure thats the case. We cannot put ourselves in a position where our city workers face layoffs and have a scenario as supervisor walton said where more raises can be the result of this decision today which i think is a fairly likely conclusion certainly it raises in the coming years. I appreciate the very challenging decisions that are in front of us and everyones position. And i think were unit the around reform and taking action. And this is a very difficult i think in many ways unfair position this board has been put in and i appreciate the challenge that is in front of us but i think that is something that were going to have to move forward with. Supervisor supervisor preston. Supervisor thank you, president yee. Through the m. O. U. Were rejected how much would come through in raises through the balance of this fiscal year . The p. O. A. S do a 2 raise in december and increases in their pension pay both of which are being delayed. Supervisor how much are we talking . Do you mean the total value . Supervisor we heard predictions around the potential impact. I want to get clear on the p. O. A. If the m. O. U. Were rejected how much in this physical year in expenditures would be required to pay the increases not be deferred. Id like to defer that question to control. Supervisor preston, through the president , we have approximately 7. 1 million for the current fiscal year. Supervisor thank you. And through president yee to the controller, and then increases would again kick in a sixmonth period without the increases . Savings of 7. 1 million in the current fiscal year and approximately 6. 2 million in the second year and deferred cost youre talking of occurs in the third fiscal year, fiscal year 2223. Supervisor thank you. In the event were rejected and the additional expenses were became due at the fiscal year, is there anything that would require any City Employee to be laid off as a result of that increased expenditure . I think those are questions for mayor and board of supervisors and mou howd it would be a threat is a question for the mayor and board. Supervisor and be nothing precluding the 7. 1 million coming from the existing already approved state budget. That would be one of many choices, supervisor preston. Supervisor thank you and thank you president yee. I want to say if were stating a commitment to not only to Police Reform but Defunding Police theres many ways to balance this money not only looking at the Police Budget and this is less about my colleagues comments and i have found it throughout this and find it through the discussions for weeks really alarming that we would just accept a blanket threat directed at city workers. A 7. 1 million hole in the budget. The idea that would trigger massive layoffs of hundreds of people across this city makes no sense from a mathematical perspective. I wanted to speak to the line of questions with president montoya, i dont think the improvement of leadership at the p. O. A. Or improvement of relationships dictates that we dont address reform in a contract. So whether or not those factors are all accurate and to extent to which theres movement for reform i think thats a positive thing. If anything, it suggests to me more than opportunity for the p. O. A. And d. H. R. To have reached agreements around some of the things president montoyas saying the p. O. A. Would agree to and under scores the need for those to have been part of the conversation. I wonder and would be interested if any colleagues are looking at a winwin in which theres a short reprieve continuance or opportunities. If the board does believe strongly there should be discussion of reforms if the p. O. A. Is amenable to discussing some of these reforms, if d. H. R. Is willing to change the strategy of now including some of those whether theyre missing an opportunity for conversations to happen over the next week or two or something that went necessarily put the m. O. U. At risk but would allow those conversations to proceed. I do want to put that out there and then have one final line of questions just for on the specific issues of the reforms to and actually before i wrap that up just through the president , i did want to ask director eisen and president montoya if the board were to continue the matter if theyd be open to having those kinds of discussions around potentially reducing some of these commitments around reform to writing and bringing the item back to the board . Supervisor director, are you we could continue to work with the p. O. A. On anything the board would like to see. I understand that president montoya already testified to in principle. The p. O. A. Already arrived agreement on a number of items of answering street calls. I dont think it should interfere with the question here which and i understand many members of the board of supervisors and public have disappointed about it. But this is really a simple economic question about the delay of wage increases for Police Officers similar to what happened in our Fire Department. Similar to what you voted on just now for the command staff of the Police Department and command staff of the Fire Department. Itd be no impediment to the p. O. A. And d. H. R. And the Department Tennessee continuing or citing letters of understanding under response to calls in the street if thats what you mean by reform. Theres many other top beings the Police Commission is work its way through and that well go through formal meet and confer. Supervisor supervisor preston. The p. O. A. Is committed to work on the recommendations. Weve moved many forward just in the past few months and we continue to be willing to work with the department and be a partner in making sure these are accomplished. Like i said were on track for doing that right now and we have no reason to change course. Thank you. Supervisor and switching gears slightly on the issue, of the particular reforms and director eisen you referred to some of the ones that would potentially be outside discussions that may be outside an m. O. U. But i did want to talk about some you alluded to but not in the context of the contract and looking specifically at the m. O. U. On page 2, section 4, paragraph 5 where meet and confer is addressed. Because i do think the heart of a lot of the concerns here is the misuse of the meet an confer process. As you said, theres certain things the Police Commission can and should deal with. We know historically part of the problem is that in itself can make their decisions and get tangled into significant delays because of triggering the meet and confer process. So my concern in that paragraph is that it seems to me and i know two advocates who reached out including from the Bar Association, that the language there seems to broaden meet and confer when thats triggered and available far beyond whats required by state law and i would submit that this is kind of the heart of if i were changing one thing in here, it would be this language and i just want to make sure that im not misreading this but if you could basically require the department to give notice to the p. O. A. Of any proposed change in general orders it also states the association would be required to meet and confer regarding any change. If the p. O. A. Adopted a less cooperative attitude than what is being described by supervisor peskin and president montoya and yourself in eight months or a year or tomorrow and decided that any general order should go through the meet and confer process and essentially be delayed by a year or two, doesnt the provision of the m. O. U. Expressly allow them to do that . Supervisor, i also discussed that issue with the Bar Association and while i would agree its not written as clearly as it could be, that is legacy language that has been in that p. O. A. Contract and by the way, also in our fire and sheriff contract going back now since the early 1990s. It has never been asserted by any of those unions to mean what you could intentionally read into it and what the Bar Association has read into it. It says we provide notice of change to general orders and to the extend those changes either the decision or the impact of the changes and that we engage in the meet and confer process. We do not under that language engage in meet and confer over permissive subjects. In fact we have definitely done everything we can to avoid engaging in meeting and conferring over either permissive or nonmandatory subjects. We simply dont do that. Weve gotten in that fight with the p. O. A. In the past and never under that language. Im sure we can rewrite that clause by mutual agreement with the p. O. A. And ourselves to mean what its intentional is a provision and recognition on the part of the city when assert the city will engage in meet and confer over matters within scope under the brown act. Its [indiscernible] we have that obligation whether its in the m. O. U. Or not in the m. O. U. And director, sit in the past has the p. O. U. Has the p. O. A. Ever referenced this very language as justification for broader interpretation . Not that im aware of and as i say this language dates back to probably 1990s. The very first m. O. U. With the p. O. A. Adoption by the voters section of the charter. I understand why the bar was concerned but that is not the sense of the problem. Its an issue of policy and also that was decided in the Appellate Court when we refused to meet and confer over what the city deemed to be a matter of refer for the city in reserve for the city in [indiscernible]. And president yee ill wrap up because i know theres many comments. In the interest of the colleagues if theres thoughts on the idea of continuance and whether that might allow time to not only address the issue of the classification of the language around meet and confer and try to find areas of Police Reform where there is agreement and get those down in writing in a way that we can come back before the board and maybe folks can more positively feel about the whole package. Thank you very much. Supervisor so supervisor preston, so there is not a question well answer unless youre going make a motion to do so. Supervisor i may. I was just putting it out there. Theres others on the roster so if anyone wanted to address it before i decided one way or the other. Supervisor supervisor walton. Supervisor thank you so much, president yee. And thank you for the recommendations supervisor peskin. Im going to speak on the fact that i would be supportive of continuing this and having further negotiations with d. H. R. And p. O. A. If the time line is appropriate i think thats a wonderful idea. Supervisor okay. I dont see anybody else on the roster. Supervisor president yee, i just added myself and i would like to make a motion if there are no other Public Comments. Supervisor got it. Objection. Go ahead. I see others. I dont know if anybody else wants to speak to the issue. Supervisor okay. I may make a motion. Supervisor madame clerk, i cant see anybody beyond supervisor walton. Mr. President , under supervisor walton is preston, mandelman and haney. Theres a bar of light gray color if you tried to slide it down. Supervisor it didnt work three times. Preston, mandelman and haney. Supervisor i think supervisor preston was going wait for the other two. Supervisor mandelman. Supervisor i guess thank you, president yee. I guess im trying to understand what an additional weeks will get us. The m. O. U. S have taken some time to come to us. I guess i question given what i heard from ms. Eisen what we think would happen during those few weeks that would make the situation different in a few weeks. Supervisor and theres a question in there, director eisen. Id need more clarification if a motion gets made and well run out of time here. We put this hearing off essentially the last possible moment. Were going run out of time to make the changed changes in the payroll system to respond to that point. Id need to get greater clarification in what the board would be asking us to attempt at atto to achieve. We did enter into a tentative agreement with the p. O. A. In good faith and it would take two negotiating partners. I cant say exactly how the organization may or may not respond to further delay here. Supervisor supervisor heaney. Haney. Supervisor director eisen, can you address the time. We dont have a meeting next week to two weeks from now, when the rate is supposed to go into effect and if we dont approve this the raise just happens what are the consequences . If you dont approve it theres in change fot m. O. U. To the m. O. U. Is the rates go in to effect december 26 is the start of the pay period. Controllers office does need a certain amount of time to make changes to the system. Right now it is set up for the raise to take place. So thats where were at. You dont have a meeting next week so im not sure if youre immediate subsequent meeting would be sufficient time to ask the questions then we have to answer but if we do nothing or you put it off, then what the actions of what the board just took the Fire Department would not get their raises. The police rank and file would get their raises and the please management would not get their raises. That would be the impact of that today. Supervisor so i think controller, would you have an answer to this . Timing is tight for the Payroll Processing to make things right by the end of december. I think we would likely accommodate an action by the board on december 1 by the next meeting but no later than that. At that point if the board action wasnt made that week and in the subsequent week we would lose the ability to reprogram the payroll system to change what the status quo is. Supervisor okay. [please stand by]. Can i hold the discussion for a second . My board was doing all kinds of stuff, and i cant tell what was going on. If you have the meeting chat large okay. Were discussing more than a motion. Supervisor preston, do you have a motion . I would prefer to discuss a motion and not a possible motion. Absolutely, president yee. I move to continue the item to december 1. A motion and a second. A point of order, mr. Chair. Mr. President. Who is speaking . Im sorry. Supervisor safai. Im sorry. I had my name on the roster. I just didnt get called. Yeah. Not there yet. So point of order permitted. An i am not clear in terms of the request for the continuance exactly what direction is being given so it is hard to vote on a motion for continuance going into the holidays not knowing what d. H. R. Would be requested to do. I havent gotten 100 clarity from d. H. R. Of the over all implications of this continuance as it relates to fire and all the other m. O. U. S on the agenda today. And the overall implications to the overall budget negotiations including all the m. O. U. S that were negotiated including the pay raises that could be jeopardized as part of this delay. I havent heard that 100 clarity. There is a lot of conversation about the m. O. U. Itself and not understanding what the continuance would be hoping to accomplish. That is why i have asked for a motion so we could clarify the intent. [taking vote] supervisor safai, if you would like to ask a question for clarification. An i heard about the impact that and what the implications that has and been a lot of talk about layoffs and not trying to bring that back up, but i know that potentially all city pay raises that have been negotiated could be impacted if this first round of wage increases for the p. O. A. And subsequently the firefighters whose contracts mirror one another. It is not just the overall implication and i understand it to be larger than that and to go back and potentially renegotiate a lot of the existing contracts on the table. Can you talk about that a little further . I think the contracts and the Labor Agreements that would be impacted are the ones you just approved earlier in the meeting. I think that in terms of negotiations would be the two m. O. U. Yt and presented as a package to the board of supervisors. To go back to the the proech and labor to ask them whether they would be willing to delay their wage increases that were guaranteed in the m. O. U. S and the Police Officers and the firefighters came forward and said, yes, they would be willing to do that. They extended the m. O. U. S by two years and put in what we considered to be wage increases that they would otherwise achieve in bargaining. And under a590, the 3 and the 3 with the off occurring with the money due them over this twoyear period. That is the simple deal. If you want to go to get further something out of the Police Officers association in exchange for that deal, it was already testified that a draft letter exists around matters of appropriateness to responding to certain types of calls. If that would be satisfactory, that could be signed and presented to the board. It would be we would have to look at what that looks like legislatively. I am not entirely sure, but my guess is that it would not something presented for adoption by the board, but still be the agreement that is in front of you right now. Similar to the one you just adopted and the three you just adopted and the police and Fire Departments. So to be very clear about what the expectation is if to delay that on the call directly and he can hear it directly from you as well. So that we know and the union d decide whether or not to engage in further discussion. And we may be back here where we started. Through the president , can the controller tell us the overall dollar amount for the contract that if we are not to approve those, the one that just happened or continue those . So u yo said it was 7. 1 million and other contracts that were approved today. So to the chair and the controller, and we had fire and another contract and can you tell us the dollar amount with the overall implication of that. President comptroller i think could answer that, but i also heard that we voted to pass that and has no impact. That is correct, mr. President. It would have adopted the other contracts on the agenda earlier today and the numbers that i represented earlier were specific to the p. O. A. Supervisor got it. Supervisor mr. President , can i ask for a point of information . President supervisor peskin, is that you . Supervisor yes. With all due respect to our controller, we did not adopt anything yet. We passed previous items on First Reading. That is right. Supervisor and what is before us is being presented on First Reading. And if it were approved today, it would come before this body again for the second reading on december 1. So i want to rise to that point of information. I will speak to that later and i am called on and to the controller and my colleagues and all of this is on First Reading. And these are not resolutions and require two readings. With the contracts and approved with the dollar amounts. With the president and the total value of the amendments before you today and in totality and and 7. 1 million and to add that to the contracts and the difference of 5. 2 million and to the chair and supervisor peskin and with regard to the amount of time that should be given. And appreciate it. Thank you, mr. Chair. Supervisor fewer. Through the controller and the controller and to mention the timeline you said that you could do something if the board decided on december 8. We have been reminded that would be the First Reading. In order for this to be an ordinance, it would have to be approved the following week. Would that shrink the timeline . Supervisor fewer, i use that inartable reading to approve on december eight and a tight window and one that we could achieve to the end of the december timeline. And so to correct fe if u am wrong, but to go to the p. O. A. And refine the language and to narrow the scope of the language that is in the contract concerning meet and confer. That is what i understood supervisor preston to have said. I am asking through the chair, through the president , mr. President , is that what were asking for this delay to go with the p. O. A. To add officially into the m. O. U. The language that limits the scope of meet and confer . And because you mention that the Bar Association says that this is a broad description in the m. O. U. , is that correct . The opportunity to address what you directed and from the meet and confer on the contract and with the other areas to confirm. And being asked to trust that there is Common Ground and if there is Common Ground, it seems like before that is brought back and to get up and running and i would defer to the negotiating parties as to whether those kind of changes belong in the m. O. U. Or in separate agreements. I think there is clearly as set forth some legal considerations on that. So would be two purposes to correct or tighten up the language on meet and confer and look at the areas of potential agreements with the reform for inclusion in the m. O. U. Or outside the m. O. U. Supervisor and i want to mention last week, president yee, that i dont think we should have to be concerned about whether or not we delay this or not that it would actually make or insure that there would be layoffs of city workers. We have been assured by the mayors staff wholeheartedly that that is not going to happen. And that is not the intention of the mayor. I think that we can take this vote with confidence that other City Employees will not be laid off. Thank you. President supervisor peskin. Supervisor thank you, president yee. Lets see if i can try to land this thing. And i want to go back to my previous statement that these have two readings. Lets be clear f we actually go back to the m. O. U. , that would actually require a new tentative agreement and we are not going to hit bens dates, the outside of which is the second reading by 12 by 8 december. So i actually think we do have an opportunity and we have seen some statements by the p. O. A. Around a number of areas that i think we all agree on that could be enshrined in a side letter and what i would suggest is we not continue this and that we is under the purview of the chief executive mayor breed. That would be Human Resources. Ms. Eisen to engage the bargaining unit over some of the changes that the board clearly wants in the intervening days and however many days that is and see whether or not a side letter, not a change the m. O. U. , which would trig err new tentative agreement, can be achieved. And that we vote on this today. And we see whether or not that side letter can be agreed to between now and the second reading and then determine whether or not we want to continue the second reading. President thank you very much. Supervisor ronen . Supervisor yes. This could have all been avoided had we known this was happening in the first place. I mean f i had had time to put together a list of reforms that i would like to see with this m. O. A. , i would have come prepared. There is a draft letter to do with haney and my legislation and Mental Health s. F. That we both deeply care about and would be fantastic to have that attached to this. That is great, but that does not take care of the meet and confer language that supervisor preston was talking about which is in the m. O. U. And which would require an amendment to the m. O. U. I am not sure if supervisor peskin and preston are talking about the same thing. I do have a long list of other things that i would love to have seen negotiated and with the reforms around Mental Health s. F. And so have we had input into the process from the get go, we wouldnt be where today. And that is why this transparency ordinance. So i would love to see that side deal around Mental Health s. F. If that could happen in the way that supervisor peskin lays out, then fantastic. I am okay with that. I still woel vote for the m. O. U. Today, but who knows what happens on the second vote. But i would like to hear through the chair from supervisor preston if that satisfies your intention which i dont believe that it does. President supervisor preston. Supervisor it doesnt. I appreciate the input and procedurally with the second reading would provide some time. I think that its different, frankly, and i think that voigting on the first and the controllers and voting in on the first and the controller is saying presumed on the first and passed on second reading on the 8th still gives the time if the wages are going to be deferred for that to happen. And just to be clear to the comments earlier from supervisor safai this, in itself doesnt create that hole. This will continue to december 1, the decision. I understand there is a fairly tight timeline. Not as much of a cushion were it to pass on december 1 and then on second reading on the 8th. But i would not be rescinding the motion and still think a continuance would be in order for the First Reading to december 1. President and supervisor roan, did you have other further comments . Supervisor none at this time. President supervisor haney . Supervisor thank you, president yee. To the chair and director eisen, in term of the direction you have heard from the potential continuance, can you respond to how you would go about this . And whether you have sufficient direction . In particular, i am asking about the piece of this that relates to the change related to meet and confer. And is it clear what we would be asking for there and can you clarify how you would go about it . And i dont know if president montoya has his hand up, but just to flag that for you, chair, president yee. President okay. Director eisen . Well, let me see if i can restate what i think. And i will give you my response it to. On the first point around the negotiations responsibility clause that supervisor preston pointed out in the m. O. U. , thats in the m. O. U. It can not be changed without agreement of the parties. My understanding of the p. O. A. s bylaws along really virtually with every Union Representing City Employees is that the president s of the union and the executive board have no authority to change that m. O. U. Without a vote of its entire membership. So that given the timeline would not be realistic, i dont think, that we could actually amend the m. O. U. , nor could we amend this p. A. Per se. It is a stand alone item. Would we enter into a side letter with the p. O. A. On certain matters that would be an enforceable side letter without further process internally within the p. O. A. . That was potentially achievable. I would have to discuss that with the association and also with our City Attorneys Office for advice about entering into a side letter in terms of the content of that letter. And whether or not it would have to constitute an amendment to the m. O. U. I doubt it would. Supervisor and okay. We do enter into side letters routinely in the city. In mid contract cycle. But its typically about matters that are outside of the m. O. U. Such as who responds to calls. Those are issues when i think about it, our the reserved rights for the employer to make the decision and they have impact on work and every worker who would be affected be i the decisions of the nature would have a right to meet and confer over the impacts. Whether it is the union that is losing the work to the p. O. A. Or the unions, probably multiple unions, that would be gaining the work, similar to the coalition that we all worked with and that i supported in the placing of the Mental Health s. F. Charter on the ballot. It is essentially a continuation of those type of discussions. But it is probably possible for the union to enter the p. O. A. To enter into some type of letter of intent, possibly not enforceable in the way that you would like, but it would be a statement of interest. We could potentially enter into Something Like that. Supervisor ronen i am happy to clarify. Supervisor so essentially what you are saying is you cant amend the m. O. U. In time because of the process that would have to be involved with the p. O. A. Itself but on the issue of meet and confer or some other issue, there can be an agreement or letter of intent as it related to the m. O. U. Or things in it that could be agreed to. Just last question i want to ask and this may also be for the controller, to be clear f there is a continuance of two weeks here for this m. O. U. , there are no negative impacts on that to our budget situation. Can you just confirm that . And that this wouldnt lead to any layoffs of city staff or any other cuts that would come as a result of a continuance of two weeks . Through the president and supervisor haney, i think the thing that matters for our operations here is simple that we have final board approval of the m. O. U. By december 8. So as supervisor peskin has noted, that would be on second read by that date. That would leave us time to implement changes in the citys payroll system necessary to reprogram the raises otherwise due at the end of december. That is kind of the fundamental date for us. I think the predecessor steps necessary by the department of Human Resources and the Clerks Office and others to achieve that, i would defer to them. President supervisor haney. Supervisor sorry. Through the chair, director eisen, do you have any thoughts on that from your perspective . You are muted. My apologies, supervisors. I think a letter of intent on very specific topics that the board could be clear about what the topics are that dont intersect with rights that are already contained within the m. O. U. As i stated in response to supervisor prestons concerns about that negotiations responsibility clause, i know that many people have read it and have opinions about it, but i am wondering what i am testifying to and telling you is that it is not exercised in the way that you read it. It is simply used as a notice provision at which we are obligated to do under the myers miller brown act. And it obligates the city to negotiate over matters within scope, which we are obwill i gaited to do again under mmva, the state law thats been on the books since the late 1960s. Its the law of the land in the state of california and california local government over collective bargaining with employee organizations. So i understand that supervisor preston, the Bar Association is concerned about that language. We will and i can assure you that it is not exercised in the manner that you have stated. We will put it into our hopper for the next round of negotiations to do those what would essentially will clerical amendments to it. And in term of any letter of intent around Mental Health sf and what the p. O. A. s intentions are there with respect to the claiming of work, that may be something that we could do in terms of a letter of intent. But waiver of collective bargaining rights, that would be entirely up to the p. O. A. As i said, we went through this discussion in 2018. What i testified to at government oversight, we went through that conversation in 2018 and we placed on the bargaining table at the boards direction and in good faith which we argued in the public proceedings in the arbitration phase about limiting and getting the p. O. A. To agree to limit the collective bargaining rights on matters that were contained within the d. O. J. Recommendations. The arbitrator told us after lengthy arguments that the city would be an untermed labor practice for the city to condition and anything within scope on a waiver of meet and confer rights to apply to the p. O. A. And any other union we deal with in the city. So i think our best opportunity is to work with mr. Montoya, work with his board, encourage the Police Commission to proceed with implementation of all of those recommendations. And move on in good faith working with the change organization, be it imperfect, and is a work in progress. But i can go back and attempt to get a letter of intent if this is the boards desire. President supervisor haney, are you done . Supervisor that is all. Thank you, president yee. President supervisor peskin . Supervisor thank you, president yee. I will be very brief. Much has been made of a potential side letter or letter of intent, and mr. Montoya spoke to that, but i dont want to hear from mr. Montoya, but i would like to hear chief scott, as you have a labor negotiator on your team who i do not see on the participant list, but i would like to talk to. Can you produce luanna preston, chief . Through the president. Supervisor peskin, im here. Where . Im in one of the little boxes in the corner. Good afternoon, board of supervisors. President she is somewhere, but i dont know where. Supervisor well, i can hear you. I can not see you, but i would like to ask you about the side letter, quote, unquote, or Side Agreement that the president of the p. O. A. Discussed. And my understanding is that there is agreement between the city or the executive branch, h. R. , the Police Department, if you will, on the one hand, and the p. O. A. On the other hand as relates to any number of areas of past responsibility being off loaded from the sfpd to other agencies. Does such a document exist . What is the status of that document . Can you i mean, this is all kind of been very vague. I have never gotten my finger on it. Can you discuss that . Sure. Tony, mr. Montoya is correct. Back in august t Police Department, myself, and the command staff had formal meet and confers with the p. O. A. As it relates to what type of calls sworn officers would no longer go on to as it relates in particular to sf Mental Health. And we were able to reach tentative agreements regarding a number of calls. I think mr. Montoya said was about 23 of them that the p. O. A. Agreed that those are the type of calls that could be transferred to civilian employees. And so there is a document that we have been in discussion about that the p. O. A. Has signalled they absolutely agree to. Supervisor to ms. Preston, relative to the status, you said you have meet and confer pursuant to myers millers brown and you have not reached impasse. You have reached agreement. What is that been codified or documented in an instrument or side let sner er . There you are. Now i see you. There is a draft letter. I do think that there is some discussions that were going on at the same time with the city as it relates to the Economic Issues that the board has been discussing, but if its the boards desire for those conversations to be formalized, that is something the department absolutely could engage in. Supervisor well, let me take it to the next step. Sound like you are already engaged in said discussions. Can said discussions be concluded and can said discussions be agreed to in what we do in our society, writing, in enforceable agreement between now and the first day of december of the year 2020 . I believe that such a side letter could be reached with the p. O. A. I would like to meet with the City Attorneys Office as it relates to the language for it to be a side letter. It would not be attached to the m. O. U. But i would like legal guidance as to the exact language that would be acceptable to the City Attorney prior to signing it. But there is a draft copy. Supervisor i understand. But it sounds like as a threshold issue, there are no policy disagreements between the parties. It sound like conceptually this has been agreed to. And it must be formalized and the City Attorney plays that role, is that correct . Correct. And in your how many decades of experience in Labor Relations on the labor side, and now on the city side, do you think Something Like this where the parties are in agreement would take to actually codify . Or agree to . In writing. I dont believe that agreement would take very long because its something that we have been working on since august. So it would be signed by december 1, i believe, working with the p. O. A. If its possible. I think thats possible. Supervisor okay. So speaking on behalf of one of the 11 of us, good luck and godspeed. I want to see that. Im available over the next 12 days to hear about it, to advise, not to consent, and only the entire body can do that or the body is actually not a part of that, but we can all advise. So i would suggest that we vote on this on the First Reading. That you conclude that and stay in touch with supervisors ronen and preston and president of the board, this supervisor, supervisor fewer, and everybody else without violating the brown act or any other stretchers, between now and the first day of december. And if you dont get there, i am speaking again as 1 11th of the board, i reserve the right to continue the matter on the second reading. President supervisor ronen. Supervisor you are muted. Supervisor ronen thank you, mr. President. Through the president , miss preston i am the lead officer of Mental Health sf together with matt haney and this is the first i hear that theres been meet and confer negotiations around this major part of our legislation that have been going on since august. How did those negotiations begin . And why werent we informed . Let me say the discussions with the p. O. A. Was not specifically about your legislation. It was about officers going out on Mental Health calls. And those type of calls where maybe employees from social services or employees from department of Public Health and that is the center of the discussion and which calls are something they would no longer go on. Supervisor ronen that is a major part of the Mental Health sf and it is not a practice of d. H. R. To inform the lead officers legislation when a major part of that legislation is subject to meet and confer implementation . A i no longer work for the department of human resource. I work directly for the Police Department and the chief of police. In my assignments in the Police Department, the authority to conduct meet and confer with the p. O. A. Was delegated to me from d. H. R. Which is since i have been since june doing the meet and confer and the p. O. A. Had written letters to the Police Department to engage in the discussions and so this is one of the first issues is what type of Mental Health calls and those type of calls are better suited for civilian employees to handle and not the sworn officer. Supervisor ronen it was the p. O. A. Who initiated the meet and confer. They issued that to meet. Supervisor ronen, i would like to respond to this line of questioning. With the issue of responding to calls and in terms of meet and confer, we guard jealously and in support of your legislation and the Charter Amendment to have the ability to make those decisions, we would have to ultimately be able to enter into the discussions and the reality as you well know is to divert the calls and the p. O. A. Will be a partner in this work and of course it would come back to the board as the reality of laying the infrastructure in place and making those decisions around the diversion of calls, that would come into play then in supporting the board in terms of all your Labor Relations and the decisions you need to make. To clarify, the p. O. A. Approved to specific diversion call. They did go into much more depth than general calls. Supervisor ronen why wasnt that meet an confer finished and memorialized and why sit open and why are we having this discussion right now . I think in part because of what ms. Eisen just said. The p. O. A. Can agree they would not go out on certain calls as it relates to Mental Health services, but then who would . And once those classifications were determined, the city has, as ms. Eisen suggested, has a legal obligations to meet with other unions to determine what the classifications are, what the working conditions are, and what duty of work would be encountered when they go out on those type of calls. Additionally, if something was to go wrong on those calls, when will the police be called back . And if so, what were those circumstances . Is there is a large variety of questions that need to be answers to bring this discussion to conclusion. Supervisor ronen okay. And if i havent made the case today for the need for transparency, i dont know what would make that case. I appreciate that, ms. Preston. Thank you. I think that that particular issue on the agreement around which calls will be answered by Mental Health professionals as opposed and given that the p. O. A. Is ready to agree to those, with eneed additional input from the Mental Health sf implementation work group, i dont think that is going to provide any resolution here for this body on this m. O. U. I will just say that right now. These are things that the m. O. U. And if it was enough and that it reflected it reflect what is this board believes is fair and just or i dont think that pausing it for that purpose, for the purpose of this Side Agreement on Mental Health sf makes sense anymore. I have a ton of other questions, but i dont think its relevant at this moment to this vote on this m. O. U. President supervisor walton. Supervisor thank you so much, president yee. I was going to state after all the discussion and the ability to continue with the body so desires, i am going to withdraw my second. President supervisor preston. Supervisor thank you, president yee. I think the message we are sending with a continuance is to d. H. R. To the and to the p. O. A. To the greatest extent possible to deliver on commitments, unreformed commitments, and had we as a body been consulted along the way and if we had a more transparent process in place, thats what i think most if not all of this board would have been saying along the way. And unfortunately, thats not the process, and so here we are at the one moment we can weigh in. I think that its not taking the initial vote today that would be helpful, frankly, in motivating the parties to the m. O. U. And to reach some agreement and make some commitments. I think theres nothing in a negotiation like uncertainty to motivate the parties to make some concessions or reach agreements. And i think if we vote on the merits today with the idea that the second reading will somehow be the place at which well have that discussion, and i think shooting ourselves in the foot. And i understand the strategy and i dont think that its the way to go. I think it a twoweek continuance will allow the conversation to happen. I think no Financial Impact whatsoever and nothing is articulated and impose any hardship on anyone and create a tight timeline and we have been assured by the controller that it will, if it were improve and the first and second reading on the 8th, that that would give sufficient time to implement. So would urge colleagues to support a continuance. I do finally just want to say in the event that its continued, or even if not, actually, since it will be back before us regardless, i also want to say to the executive branch of government, i would like to hear a clear and unequivocal statement about the previously made outside this body threat to lay off city workers. I find those kind of threats totally unacceptable. I understand people can disagree about the wisdom of this contract and in good faith have different views about it. I think we can discuss that. I think to try to put on the table punishing city workers that are not even a party to this contract is totally out of bound and through the president , if ms. Kittler wants to state it today, great. If not, next time it is back before, you would like to hear a clear statement that the layoff of city workers is not on the table and is in no way regardless of vote on the Police Officer association m. O. U. , regardless of how that ends up, that other city workers can rest easy and not be afraid for their jobs. President thank you, supervisor preston. Just for clarification, supervisor walton, are you withdrawing your second to the motion . Supervisor that is correct. Supervisor im second. Ill second. President this is a first and second to continue the item to december 1. Roll call please. On the motion to continue item 19 to december 1, supervisor haney. Aye. Haney, aye. Supervisor mandelman . No. Mandelman, no. Supervisor mar . No. Mar, no. Supervisor peskin . No. Peskin, no. Supervisor preston . Aye. Preston, aye. A supervisor ronen . Aye. Ronen, aye. Supervisor safai . No. Safai, no. A supervisor stefani . No. Stefani, no. Supervisor walton . Aye. Walton, aye. Supervisor yee . No. And supervisor fewer . No. There are ayes and seven nos. President the motion to continue the item fails. Madam clerk, please call the roll on the item itself, i guess. Clerk item 19, supervisor haney . Aye. Haney, aye. Supervisor mandelman . Aye. Mandelman, aye. Supervisor mar . Aye. Mar, aye. U a supervisor peskin . Aye. A supervisor preston . No. Preston, no. Supervisor ronen . No. Ronen, no. Supervisor supervisor safai . Aye. Safai, aye. Supervisor stefani . Aye. Stefani, aye. Supervisor walton . Aye. Walton, aye. Supervisor yee . Aye. Yee, aye. And supervisor fewer . There are nine ayes and two nos with supervisors preston and ronen in the dissent. President vote of 92, the motion passes. Not motion. The item is passed on First Reading. Colleagues, i know that this is that was a very healthy discussion and i think regardless of how it went, the discussion itself has triggered to me a lot of things for not only for ms. Eisen to think about in the future but also the administration itself in term of how we deal with these issues. I would like to supervisor fewer, i want to take a fiveminute recess because i need to do something. And you have something to say . Supervisor yes, supervisor yee. I think there is much discussion about getting together a letter and what we have directed her, i think, this to come back to us with this december 1 and you might recall what supervisor peskin said earlier. So ms. Eisen, do you have the information that you need from us . Because i am hearing i think that what ewith would still like for you to do is december 1 to come back with that formalized agreement. Perhaps, supervisor, chair yee, could delegate a member or two to work with me because i have to say, im after this discussion, i certainly has given me a lot to think about. I am looking forward to reviewing supervisor ronens legislation and working with her on it to support it as we can. I am very much in favor of generally of the concepts around involving as many parties as possible in negotiations while still working towards the agreements that we know that we need with our City Employees. And i am a little concerned about what i am going to deliver back to the board if its a statement of intent from the p. O. A. On responding to calls, if its clarity around with negotiations responsibility language. I am happy to try to do any of those things. I think i previously testified to what i see is some of the constraints in terms of entering into anything especially on the association side by the city as well. President supervisor ronen, would you be willing to volunteer to guide this process. It seems that you have some ideas around that. Supervisor ronen absolutely. And i think we should start out with the transparency legislation. Because to me thats the crux of the problem. We dont even know these meet and confers are happening. We dont know what they are happening about. Etc. So i will work with you, ms. Eisen about the general legislation i am putting forward as well as supervisor haney and i can get together with you and figure out, and miss preston, about what is going on with Mental Health sf and how we can make sure to involve all the relevant parties. President and supervisor peskin, are you you are muted. But did you want to volunteer also . Supervisor it sound like i just got volunteered. President yes. That the two of you can between what we heard and just to make sure that supervisor i am clear on what we heard. And i think that most importantly is drilling down on the conceptual agreement around the 23 areas. And i am happy to participate with supervisor ronen and ms. Eisen, yes, sir. President appreciate it. So right now i would like to take a fiveminute recess. Clerk mr. President , just point of information to the member. It is really important that that kind of conversation occur before the vote or that you rescind the vote so that we can capture that as part of the official action. For next time. Okay. Thank you. President sure. I will have a fiveminute recess right now. And to my clock is 4 52. So we will be back at 4 57. Okay we are back in session now. I see that were way behind schedule. Were at our 3 00 p. M. Item. Our first¥x÷ 3 00 p. M. Item. So, madam clerk can you call our first 3 00 p. M. Special order 24 and 25. Items 24 and 25. Comprise the board of supervisors sitting as a committee of the whole schedule pursuant to resolution 403 20 adopted september 15, 2020 for public hearing of the board to consider the subject matter contained in item 25 lvhu whichs the renewal of a property based Business Improvement district known as Fishermans Wharf. To commence with fiscal year 2020 through 2021 and to make the appropriate findings. Okay. The purpose of this hearing is to hear testimony on proposal of the assessments business basedn Business Improvement,t]. k dist name, the fisherman wharftobhi t side community]rvsjbf benefit d. September 15, 2020. As described in the management district plan the proposed district would include approximately 45 identified busi. 5n details of the covered area are in the file. At the conclusion of the public hearing the department of elections would tabulate the ballots andoh[wb report too of supervisors member of the public members of the public may view the ballot tab use lace inn the basement of the city hall te board will neither levee nor approve there is a majority protest. The public testimony will be as follows. We will first hear from speakers in support of the assessment district for two minutes per person then we will hear from all speakers about opposition to do assessment district. They will also have 2 minutes each. During the hearing a Business Owner wishing to change his or her vote or who has not voted yet may speak with the department of elections staff at the table just outside of the grove street entrance to city hall. I dont if they are still outlgn there its kind of dark and cold. They will provide you the affidavit and ballot after the hearing closes. The ballots will be counted. Supervisor peskin do you have any opening remarks you would like to share . No mr. President i do not. This is in the hands of the voters based on the formula and if there is no majority protest, i will move the matter and if there is a majority protest it will die on its own terms. All right. Is there any presentation from chris . From oewg . Good evening president yee and supervisors. Chris;a b ]n corgis senior progm manager at oewd. Today were hearing a resolution to establish, renew and expand a business based improvement district. And ordering a levee against businesses located in that district for 15 yearo qin commg withr6nz fiscal year 2020 throuh fiscal year 2021. Although business based districts are formed under the same codes as our property based districts, which the board may be more familiar with the assessments are based largely on the previous years gross receipts rather than parcel characteristics. Randall scott the executive director will discuss the specifics of this later in the presentation. I would like to thank supervisor peskin and his staff, deputy secretary, and john carol from the Clerks Office. The department of elections who are just inside the gross street entrance because it did get rainy outside and lisa from oewd. If there are no questions for oewd i have in scott with me and i would be;3 presentation on my screen. Thank you chris. I cannot find it on my screen unfortunately. Alisa do you have access to this on your screen . Brent do you have that . I think he had it on his. Okay we see it. Good job. Thank you. Good afternoon president yee, members of the board of supervisors for the city and county of San Francisco. Thank you for inviting me to speak on behalf of the Fishermans Wharf Community Benefit district. Today our application to renew our port side district for the next 15 years. My name is Randall Scott im the executive director. Next slide please. Before i begin i would like to acknowledge the Strong Partnership with aaron peskin who has made himself available to assist counsel and sometimes even consult us on how we can better serve the northern part of his district thank you senator peskin. Mr. Scott, just so you know theres at least on my screen im not seeing the second slide im just seeing a bunch of little things. That is correct. Okay is that what you wanted . Yes sir. Oh, okay im sorry. My bad. Its okay. Another thank you to our key partner from oewd who has tirelessly put himself in our beck and call throughout this process. For our second renewal. Thank you chris corgis. Final. Thank you to the board of directors for providing me the tools and staff to make this a e reality. This is the correct slide so the port side cbd Community Benefit district over the past 15 years has grown with the substantial Business Owner investment into the world premier Visitor Experience through top Tier Marketing efforts including hospitality, World Class Hotels and one of a kind attractions. I have presented to the board and its committee multiple times this past year, which are these slides here, and out of respect for your time will instead focus on the future. Next slide please. The port side cbd as chris mentioned is the only business based cbd in the city. The port side businesses are not assessed on their property. Which is6pisg j owned by the pof San Francisco. So we use a combination of gross receipts, customer capacity for vessels, and flat rate assessments for the complex entity known 6mnh as pier 39. U83g evaluated firm the impacts to come up with the assessment rates you see here. As you can see the vessels are rated based upon how many they can carry. Everything else pier 39 has its own special assessment and then the businesses are gross receipts based. The restaurants and retailers due to covid next year their assessments will be virtually zero. Because theyve been shut down. So their assessments are going its going to be a tough year for everybody. Including us. There are two tiers of gross receipts that creates a balance for some of those businesses that are quite large relative ÷ to those who have very few gross receipts. Next slide. As i mentioned on the previous slide covid19 will significantly reduce the port side 2020 gross receipts assessments which will be due in june of 2021. The flat rate equate to about 58,000 will be still assessed. There are outstanding assessments due from the previous years. These past assessments will allow the Fishermans Wharf cbd to maintain the marketing levels which will really help in the economic recovery. We also sponsor the port side i should say sponsored the 4th of july and fleet Week Celebrations which total around 55,000. The port side economic recovery next slide please. The collective power of the cbd brings to our Marketing Programs the primary component of what the port Sides Mission is. Anywhere you see our trademark logo that is the result of our Marketing Efforts through Strategic Partnerships such as sf travel, leveraging our Nonprofit Standards and maximizing exposure to our world renowned and iconic district we have been able to effectively promote the district around the world. Although the focus of the immediate future will differ in our target audience and messaging our Strategic Marketing plans will be the key to the rebirth of the wharf in the city as a whole. Next slide please. In my first meeting with the there we go. In my first meeting with the Restaurant Association which is a component of the port side, one of their members pointed out and said we want what they have. Meaning the port side wanted clean and Safe Services just like the landslide. After many meetings with the port and lots of politics, we will now include Clean Safe Services on the port side. Cleaning five days a week and security with the partial contribution five days a week as well. Next slide please. o7x as many of you know the cbd is advocated for many Different Things im not going to go into everything. We engage with various organizations to generate city and port services. You know and more attention to our individual neighborhoods. Ongoing efforts regarding vending, representing the district, organizations such as cal and u. S. Travel and to increase our profile nnu worldw. On a final note i would like to thank the port side Business Owners an the port of San Francisco for stepping up during this difficult time. Who continue to believe in us and support our efforts to renew. Without them we wouldnt have such a wonderful neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions from my colleagues . Seeing no names. I have no questions, but this was amongst the first after i create the enabling law amongst the first cbds in the county of San Francisco i want to thank Randall Scott and all of the executive directors that have come before him on the water side and landslide and mr. Corgis for his stewarding not only this business based district, but all of our cbds and oned b one bid in san franc. If there is no majority protest i look forward to recommending this to my colleagues and if there is a majority protest, it will die pursuant to the law. Okay. Then right now what i will do is open it up for public testimony. Specifically for those who like to speak in support. If youre here to support the assessment district you will have an opportunity to come forward now for up to two minutes. For those who oppose the assessment district, there will be an opportunity later on there the hearing. At this time, those who support the assessment district please press 3 to be added to the cue. Madam clerk will you please call the firstg fdmdn speaker. Thank you mr. President. Operations do we have a caller . How many do we have listening and how many are actually in the queue . Yes madam clerk there are 22 listening in and two currently waiting in the queue. Thank you. Lets hear from the firstd2gx r please. I will set the timer for two minutes. The board is a bunch of murderous sociopaths what they are doing with the sfoa contract. This is not that item sir. I will just say a word for you that item had its Public Comment in committee. It is not available for agenda content for Public Comment today. Okay. So if anyone listening in the queue we will not be taking mou. All right. Operations is there another caller please . Hi, i want it thank all of you all of the supervisors especially supervisor peskin for all his work and especially Randall Scott. My name is frank i have a small fishing business. business in Fishermans Wharf since 1908 so 112 years weve beenlehkn dn there. And even in these times weve been through the bad flus and now the covid, but i want to say that the community is one of the best things i have seen come along. Weve got things at the wharf that we never had. Weve got guys down there patrolling with motorcycles at night watching our boats. My boat is right on jefferson street. Main street front row jefferson. Its like a ghost town down there. But if not for the Community Coming up and watching the boats, sending people out, cleaning things. I just want to say my experience has been nothing, but positive. They put on many events, they dock us. Like i said i have been, im a Third Generation italian fisherman my son is fourth generation. I have a grandson that loves fishing. Weve been down there, were part of what made Fishermans Wharf and to continue Fishermans Wharf we need organizations like the Community Benefit district. Thats pretty much im very fashiopassionate about this i kw there is people that might think otherwise, but yeah i think into the future. You know weve been down there a long time i would like to be down there another 112 years. And i want to thank all of the supervisors for listening. Okay. Great thank you for your comment. Operations do we have another caller. Were currently hearing from speakers in support of the Fishermans Wharf assessment district. Sorry about that i was on mute. Yes. Hi sorry my name is kathleen. Im the property manager over at geradelis square along Fishermans Wharf. I just wanted to call in support of continuing the district. Theyre really a important part of keeping the district clean and safe and wanted to call and show our support from geradeli square. Thank you for calling. Okay. Do we have any other speakers in support of the Fishermans Wharf assessment district . Operations . Lets hear from the next caller. Sorry i think i was waiting for general Public Comment not on this item. Oh, okay. Press 3 that will put you back into listening mode. Thank you. Operations another caller in support . Oh. Another caller. That completes. Thank you operations. Thank you for your comments and seeing no other speakers to in support, i will invite members of the public who wish to speak in opposition to the assessment district so please press 3. Okay. All right to the callers as the president said if you are here to speak in opposition of the Fishermans Wharf assessment district welcome. You have two minutes. First caller please. Okay. Hello caller. Okay. Please join us caller. I think we might be hitting some silent lines and so staff are going to the next caller. Madam there are nocallers in the queue. All right thank you operations. Mr. President. Seeing no Public Comment on the queue then Public Comment is now closed. Okay. I guess where we are e i would like to make a motion to continue this until later in the meeting when we hear back from the department of elections and as stated twice earlier, if there is a majority protest it will die of its own accord and if there is not i will make a motion to move this matter forward sir. Thank you very much. Is there a second . Second not necessary mr. President its just performa while the department of elections is tabulating the votes and when they do let us know, that they are ready i will let you know that the count has been returned. Okay do we need to no. You can just as the supervisor peskin indicated just set this to the side for a moment and we can go to the next hearing. Fantastic. Lets save some time. Yes. Lets go to the next hearing which is items. 26 and 27. Okay go for it. Items 26 and 27 comprise the board of supervisors convening in the setting of a committee of the whole. A schedule pursuant to 403 20 adopted on september 15th for a public hearing today, novembee subject matter contained in item 26, which is the disestablishment of a property based Business Improvement district known as the top of broadway Community Benefit district. And i should state mr. President , that item 27 requires an eight vote threshold of all members of the board pursuant to the business and tax regulations code 1510 subsection 6. Purpose of this hearing is to hear on the removal of the multiyear assessment on all parcells on the property based Business Improvement district the top of broadway Community Benefit district pursuant to get a board of supervisors the resolution and attention adopted september 29, 2020. The public testimony will be as follows. We will hear first all speakers in support of this establishment of the district for two minutes per person then we will hear from all speakers in opposition to the establishment of the district. After hearing closes the board of supervisors will vote on this establishment of the district. Supervisor peskin any opening comments . Thank you president yee. This may be an evening where i lose two Community Benefit districts. But i do want it speak a little bit to the history of the top of broadway cbd because this is actually a very small Community Benefit district that never was scaled up large enough to actually have the efficiencies to make it survive. Much like another one that failed in the Mission District that was just a couple blocks long. And interestingly enough, there was the majority protests on this district on its first vote and support waited support on its second vote some years later, but when i was first on the board, this was proposed at a cbd and there was majority protest by a sliver and the board was not in a position to approve it. Subsequently when my successor was on the board it passed by a sliver, but it was never large enough to succeed their efforts to expand into joining areas in Jackson Square and north beach for various reasons. And i just want to say for the record mr. President and colleagues and members of the public, this is not dying a covid19 death. This was kind of doa long before march of this year and were just mopping up right now. Before we do that can i ask you a question supervisor peskin . Yes mr. President. When i first read the title of the benefit district top of broadway, why was it called top of broadway the first thing that came to my mind was the restaurant on up the hill, but is there just curious. Yeah, no its a really good question. I was actually not around when it was first established. David choo was on the board. There were a number of local businesses and its then executive director young man named dominique lamandry who came up with that, but i am delighted that you remember where the old alfreds was. I remember not only that location, which really was at the top of broadway. This cbd actually did not go all the way to the top of broadway it actually ended at columbus avenue. Alfredancalfreds went to the by tunnel right by that old bass restaurant around the corner from where you grew up. Alfred subsequently moved by 750 curry street and unfortunately has become a covid19 death and alfreds in its second location is now gone which is really a tragedy. Really unfortunate. Chris . Thank you president yee and supervisor peskin i will keep this tiffy. Were hearing to disestablish top of broadway Community Benefit district. Allows the board of supervisors to disestablish any cbd or bid there the city for whatever reason with a super majority vote. There the summer of 2019, the governing board of the top of broadway cbd reached out regarding its governing board decision and request to disestablish the cbd early. It was initially formed in 2013 and 2014 and set to expire at 2021. The primary reason behind the decision was cbds operating budget had been heavily subsidized by outside sources. Beginning in 2018, these sources began to reduce their donation amount to the cbd with all support ending in 2019. Oewd worked closely with the cbd, supervisor peskin and his staff and the City Attorneys Office as well as the clerk of the Boards Office to develop legislation seeking and early disestablishment of the district. Additionally they submitted petitions indicating 47 of rate payers just short of the 50 of waited assessments needed to disestablish the cbd under the state process petition too disestablish the district. Oewd has reviewed the cbd tax documents from 2018, 2019 and confirmed the district has no assets. I would like to thank supervisor peskin and his staff, deputy City Attorney, alisa and john carol from the Clerks Office and lisa from oewd for their assistance with this assistance with this disestablishment. With me is dominic who will provide a brief presentation on the cbd. Brent would you be able to show that presentation as well . Thank you. Please give me one second. So i will make this brief because i know you have been in front of the screen for sometime. The top of our Community Benefit district im here to first off let me thank you for the opportunity to present to you on the life span and achievements of the top of broadway cbd. Hope everyone is having a good evening this evening. Flex itenext item please. Its the smallest Community Benefit district in the city or was it was formed in 2013. Started services in 2014. Only about 39 parcells around the broadway intersection. It started out with operating budget of 107,000 with a 200,000 per year dollar commitment from the Broadway Entertainment Association to sustain the organization, and get it up and running until it could commit to performing expansion to see if there was adjacent interest and expanding the boards of the cbd and create a economy scale in a functioning budget. By the end of the life span of the cbd the cbd had been operating on a budget exceeding 150,000 and thats the bare minimum we needed to maintain the public sidewalk and promote the area the Public Space Development projects. Next slide please. This is a slide of most recent example of our operating budget from this fiscal year. This was presented to the committee recently this year. As you can see our income is broking down pretty clearly and our operating expenses also very clearly in terms of the majority of our expenses was going towards operations others going to administration to pay for staff time, rent for our office space, our liability insurance. All of the bells and whistles it takes to run one of these Community Benefit districts. 16,000 for marketing the district, hiring a parttime social media contractor and also engaging in some public place making projects. Next slide please. These are the example of the committee that we had typically operate through with the top of Broadway Community district. The first being the Operations Order committee. District identity improvement and committee that as needed to talk about new developments, coming into the area or changes in permitting or new restaurants coming into the area that would be applying for certain licenses or what not. Next slide please. So heres some cumulative highlights to our Community Benefit district with regard to federal operations and we are able to after the first two years i wasnt around when the Community Benefit district was launched i came in a little bit later in 2015. But this these two staff were reflective of our abilities to extend our Maintenance Operations from five days a week to seven days a week after initially three years district cleaning operations. And you know, as you can see, we are able to remove over 40,000 pounds of trash over the five years of operation or 5,000 instances of graffiti. We pressure washed the district once every month so six times 72 times a year, really were able to just do the bare minimum to make broadway an appealing place to visit and we thought we in our staples believe we did a pretty good job with what we were working with. Next slide please. You also see some of our branding highlights through our district identity committee. We facilitated and organized the placement of ten Historical Properties around broadway. The different cultural institutions that had once been in broadway or around the area that contracted to the progressive ideals of San Francisco. We also worked with the foundation to put in ash cans and various city entities that were involved in separating this program to keep the cigarette butts off our streets and out of our gutters and finally were able to work with two Property Owners to suspend a one of a kind lighting installation above the steps on broadway and kerny. It is connected wirelessly to the internet and it can play anything from weather affects to videos to music. Were looking to upled new content. Finallythis often goes overlooked the cbd created a logo for the duration of its life span. Thats something that we are proud of because it allows members of the public to look at our service schedule, look at our minutes, our budget and lends itself to the transparency that San Francisco prides itself on. Next please. So, we come to all of this sounds great, but why wasnt this district renewed . So as supervisor peskin alluded to this was the smallest district created and from the get go it had a budget deficit. I mentioned earlier that becca was supplementing our budget for the first two years to stablize it and allow us to do an expansion, but after 2016 when we were engaging in that expansion we soon found that we didnt really have that much support from the adjacent Property Owners going down broadway and going down columbus to montgomery street. So we did a kind of exhaustive survey over two years Jackson Square, outreaching to the Property Owners on the map before you. But really we just didnt get any momentum and by 2019, in the spring, the top of broadway board of directors made a decision that essentially this was their last ditch effort to try to do something with this district if not the board should consider shutting it down one year early because we didnt have the money to continue to operate. So, thats how we got to where we are today. With i is the district disestablishment faced with a chronic deficit, tob board decided to wind down with its remaining assessments from july 2019, to december 2019, and essentially not petition the city to correct assessments for the following fiscal year so we wound down whatever assessments were left in the bank account. Since bin zeroed out and we also made rounds with the Property Owners on our board or at least fallen along with our board items. Understanding and recognizing the cbd is insolvent and cannot continue to operate with this assessment. So that weighted Property Owners is reflective of the owners that support expanning the cbd once faced with there structural deficit. And that concludes the life span of the top of broadway cbd. There is a lot of pride in the things we were able to accomplish buffeted with the structural deficit a lot of owners thought it best to end it early and you know, rather than trying to limp on through the next fiscal year. So if there are any other questions, im happy to answer them. Thank you for your presentation and work youve done in the past. Supervisor peskin . You have questions . Thank you mr. President i just want to thank them. The members of his board. To the voters it was an experiment. It lasted for a little white. While. It was good while it lasted. I salute everybody who was involved in this. Thank you joe. And with that, i am ready isnt to any Public Comment item number 27. Already. Madam clerk. Open it to Public Comment to support the disestablishment of the district. Operations do we have any callers . Madam clerk there are nocallers in the queue. Okay. All right mr. President. So in that case are there any members of the public who would like to speak in support of the disestablishment. This would be in opposition to the disestablishment. Oh, right right. So operations do we have anyone who is in opposition to the disestablishment of the top of broadway cbd . Madam clerk we have nocallers in the queue. All right. Thank you. Mr. President. Then Public Comment is now closed and this public hearing being held and is now filed. Madam clerk can you please call the roll on 27. [ roll call ] just to check with my staff supervisor safai is logged in is that correct . Yes madam clerk he is logged in. I will mark supervisor safai absent unless he comes back on immediately. Safai absent. Okay. There are ten ayes. The resolution is adopted. Would you like me to call after or before peskin . After. I got my hammer. Just hammer away the resolution is adopted unanimously. Or with ten mr. President. Supervisor peskin . I do believe that the department of elections ready to speak to items 24 and 25. And i believe we can dispose of item 25 after we hear from the department of elections where in i have been led to believe there is a majority protest and after we hear from the department of item number 25. Okay. Heats bring up the department of elections. Back to items 27. I mean items. 24 and 25 sir. 24 and 25. Okay. Mr. President. Im pulling up the department of elections report. The return weighted ballots voting for the Fishermans Wharf port side Community Benefit district was 44. 71 . And the retuekd weightedl ballots voting against the Fishermans Wharf community districtm fzdt was 55. 29 furthr indicating we have a majority protest and a motion to table this resolution would be in order. Okay. Supervisor peskin. So moved to table. Is there a second . Mandelman second. Okay. Roll call please. [ roll call ] to table 25. Supervisor haney. Hole hol[ roll call ] there are 11 ayes. The motion to table passes. Madam clerk lets go to the next special order for 3 00 p. M. Okay. Items 28 through 31 these items were continued from september 22nd, 2021 and october 20th 2021. We do have a request for continuance to december 1, 2020. Item 28 is a public hearing of persons interested in the determination of exemption from Environmental Review under the California Environmental quality act. Exemption by the Planning Department on june 16th 2019. For the proposed department of Public Health local Oversight Program site number 12076 investigation remediation project located beneath the sidewalk in front of 1776 green street item 29 the motion to street item 29 the motion to affirm the planning 4]in determination that the proposed project is exempt from further review. Item 30 the motion to conditionally reverse. And item 31 the motion to direct the preparation of findings. Thank you madam clerk. I understand these items may be continued to a later date. So well go to stefsgg, do you have any remarks . Yes thank you president yee. I just wanted to let my colleagues know we had a mediation yesterday with the apellants and project sponsor we are making progress. Both parties request a continuance to the december 1st board of supervisors meeting with the caveat given the outstanding environmental things that will be done on the property to which the project sponsors have agreed. With that i would like to move for continuance to the december 1st board of supervisors meeting. All right. Motion to continue items 28 through 31 to the meeting tuesday, december 1, 2020 made by supervisor stefani seconded by supervisor peskin. Madam clerk h6fbn before we tat motion lets take Public Comment. On the continuance itself. Are there any members of the public that wish to speak on an anticipated continuance . Operations do we have in callers in the queue who would like to speak on the continuance of these items items 28 through 31 . Madam clerk we have nocallers in the queue. Okay. Mr. President. All right. Since theres nocallers then Public Comment for the continuance continuance is now closed. Motion to continue item 28 through 31 made and seconded so, lets take a roll. On the motion to continue items to december 1,. [ roll call ]resjg9 there are 11 ayes. Okay. Items 28 through 31 are continued to regular meeting of the board of supervisors on december 1st, 2020. Madam clerk lets go to the next 3 00 p. M. Special order please call items 32 through 35. Items 32 through 35 comprise the public hearing of persons interested there the determination of exemption from issued as the commonsense exemption by the Planning Department for the proposed project at 2675 jerry boulevard. For a new grocery store, restaurant and coffee bar. At the city center. Existing shopping center. Whole foods market would occupy vacant retail space above the existing target store. Item 33 is the motion to affirm the determination by the Planning Department that the proposed project is exempt from further Environmental Review. Item 34 is a motion to conditionally reverse the departments determination subject to the adoption of written findings of the board and item 35 is a motion to direct the preparation of findings reversing that determination of exemption from further Environmental Review. Okay colleagues we have before us the project at 2635 jerry boulevard. The proprosed project is exempt from the further Environmental Review under there California Environmental quality act. Hearing the board will reverse the exemption from the Environmental Review. Proceed. Two minutes per speaker in support. Up to two minutes for presentation for the city departments. Ten minutes for the project sponsor. Two minutes for speaker in opposition and in supportoht;gs. Any objections to proceeding this way seeing none, the public hearing will proceed as indicated and is now open. Supervisor peskin. Mr. President and i will defer to district 2 supervisor stefani, but i do have a threshold question that may be outside of the scope of the hearingc procedures. That i4]negby would like to posi will defer to district 2 supervisor stefani before i ask that question. Supervisor stefani would i like to make any opening remarks . Thank you president yee. I will wait until the presentations are done and i would love toob. Lc hear supervir peskins question. Supervisor peskin youre up. Thank you mr. President. I think this is a question either to the Planning Department or the City Attorneys Office. In this particular case which i have read, there was a conditional use that was approved by the Planning Commission. And based on a class 32 category calexemption which subsequently was the subject of an appeal. Based on that appeal, and this is all in the record that is department, the Environmental Review officer actually agreed with the apellant and withdrew the class 32 exemption. And subsequently, issued a commonsense exemption which subsequently was which is before you today. But to the Planning Department, the threshold question i am asking is, in so far as the Planning Commissionq2nn÷o relien the class 32 exemption when they made the discretionary decision to approve the conditional use authorization which was subsequently with drawn doesnt that conditional use get vacated and if not why not . Either deputy City Attorney pearson can answer or someone from representing city planning. Good afternoon supervisors. Deputy City Attorney, can you hear me . Yes. So the two answers supervisor peskin question, there is nothing that requires that specific process or procedure to adopt a particular categorycal exemption or commonsense exemption. The statute is silent to what procedures are required. In fact this case law that has allowed identifying and relying on a particular categorycal exemption all the way up late in the process. There is nothing really, these procedures under chapter 31 that require certain notice and posting of the categorycal unzw an appeal there was sufficient notice for an appeal. Thats why we are here today. There is no violation of state law and nothing in chapter 31 specifically, that requires that cu should have been renewed or reissued. So chapters 31 does not require that. And in specific terms like practical terms both the commonsense exemption and the class 32 amounts to the determination by the department that there are no Environmental Impacts. [indiscernible] so through the president to counsel who i have profound respect for, can you give the case law you are speaking to . Yes. There are plenty of cases that will stand for that proposition which i had the honor to litigate robinson verses the county of San Francisco with my colleague vicky wang. That was a case about telecom boxes and they had been some small procedure in the record, if i remember0gnqn . correctlys posted a day after the project was approved andmul7w÷ revisitl the case law about what is required and issued published opinion that is the effects of exactly that. [indiscernible] nothing is required exactly precisely or what to do. Different from a eir for which the procedures are listed in [indiscernible] okay. Is that a published decision counselor . Yes i can find the citation if you give me a minute. I would be happy to look at that case and in the underlying discretionary approval was that a conditional use that was granted in that case . I believe so. Im not 100 sure, but i can go and find it. And, but, but in that case, that youre citing the issue was the fact that notice was late, not that the department determined that their notice was in essence defective and withdrew it. Yeah. I dont think the facts are exactly the same here, butu scfn proposition [ inaudible ] is that me or i believe hello . Oh, shes back. Andrea . Are you still on . She stopped for a little bit. Can you hear us . It seems like shes not hearing us. Or else ignoring us. No no. No she would never ignore us. Im checking with my staff if the president is here if there is anything that our operations can do to assist. If i may this is deputy City Attorney anne pearson. I heard from deputy City Attorney to confirm she has lost her connection to teams. But she is trying to reconnect as quickly as possible. Yeah so ms. Pearson while we dont have her, heres what think i just heard from counsel is that there are no rules here. Right . I think thats what we just heard which is, there may be some case law and facts of the case that she cited do not seem to have anything near and i dont want to put words in her mouth since shell be back in a minute with the facts of this particular case, but i do believe that when a;521x decisin making body relies on environmental information, that subsequently is rescinded, and the underlying approval is not rescinded theres something that does not seem right about that. And i think what we heard is oh, there are no rules, you know, theres no case law that is on point. I think thats what i just heard. [ anybodys mouth, but i actually believe separate apart from the commonsense exemption were about to hear that my belief is thatwdru h the underlying shoule been vacated. And with that we dont need, i just want to put that on the record. We you know, supervisor stefani and i might have to introduce a piece of legislation to make that abundantly clear, but i dont think you can say to Decision Making body hey r this piece of information then say oh, this information was bad, weve got a new piece of information, but dont worry about it. udg dont thit works. And with that i will shut up. ccl super. Supervisor peskin you bring up a good point. It was a little confusing in terms of the information that i have received on this in terms of the changing of opinions. Im also confused by this. Because and i mean i would love to hear more from the deputy City Attorney when she signs back on, but i had thought that on the discretionary thing the Decision Making body which i think was the Planning Commission has to consider whether their Environmental Impact or potential Environmental Impact of the projects and that the decision about you know whether or not there are impacts which is answered by you know the threshold thing that has to be done prior to then going on and taking action taking the discretionary action. So maybe its the case that the action can get taken andx]xvjknn the department can clean it up later by figuring out the original exemption was not the right one and Planning Commission should have been looking at a different one, but it does strike me as odd. Well, i dont know if shes back on. I am back president yee. We lost you i forget where we lost you. I am so sorry. My internet has been acting strangely today and there has been problems it seems. No need to apologize. Would you like to finish your thoughts . Yun yes. S . Qg 6 prior to taking an action. They have to consider the environmental consequences of their decisions and that is the case here the commission before approving the cu consider the Environmental Impact of this project. It did so relying on a class 32 which is a particular exemption. Seqa contains many exemption and oftentimes the department may use two because it might be there are some overlaps and, thats often done in litigation and you know the courts uphold that all the time. [overlapping speakers] as well may approve a project without explicitly states which they are relying on and then identify later. That is also upheld by the court. Therew7vvcw are no particular procedures under sequa. Its true, but a little unusual the procedural posture of this case because they relied on one and then the Planning Department decided to change it and we are relying on another exemption the commonsense exemption, but that the fact that it is unusual doesnt make it illegal because there are no procedures in sequa and because the courts have upheld their identification and a particular exemption all the way relate in the process. I o say for the record i believe that the conditional use does not exist. I want to say that on the record. I do believe we still have a sequa challenge in front of us, but i believe the junked lying approval has been vacatedz and i want to crowd that for the record. I do not believe the underlying issued, i think that given the vagueness in the law it no longer exists. I believe that it needs to get a new cu regardless of how this board adjudicates the matter that is properly before us relative will to the commonsense exemption bus , but i believe te underlying cu has been vacated. Okay. Lets have the presentation. For the a your representative. Im here and i would like to share my screen if that is acceptable. Yes do you have access . Staff were making you a presenter as we speak. Thank you. Mad act clerk hes already a presenter. Im pressing a button and nothing is happening, buttcg7nwi believe that my presentation was submitted so i dont flownf its possible to we see it. There we go. So, so im just going to have to say next slide is that acceptable . Yes mr. Wolf we have a staff person who will advance the slides on your call. Okay. So, thank you very much i will assume the ten minutes is starting now. Good evening. Mr. President , supervisors my name is mark wolf imsykfg a lae attorney and im here to address this. Next slide. Next slide. Anybody . Whoops. Well try to move through these as quickly as i can given what appears to be the time lag. Exemption this is what. This is what you have to find in order to uphold the Planning Department determination. You have to see with certainty, that there is no possibility that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, i think it goes without saying that is an extremely heavyk applicant and Planning Department to meet here. We have to be absolutely convinced not even a reasonable doubt, no shred of doubt we would submit. Next slide. What is the effected environment were talking about . The key fact here is that the project site and its vicinity are within a designatessed air pollution exposure zone which is a designation created by the San Francisco Health Department and the barrier air Quality Management district. What it means is that these agencies have already determined that People Living there this area carry a burden, an excess lifetime exposure to air pollution that is greater than 100 cases of cancer per million he can posed individuals which also happens to be the significance threshold for Cumulative Health impacts established by the air district. The aira egpollutants are toxicr contaminants and diesel particulate air matter emitted from trucks and passenger vehicles. Again keep this in mind we are in an area where residents are already suffering from an excess cancer risk. Next slide please. Next slide please. This justhduh goes to show you t its not just the city Center Project site this is the Epiphany Center across the street also in an air pollution exposure zone. A facility that provides nkcu3f services to at risk7 r3 children. Likewise the wallen berg Traditional High School is also in the same air pollution exposure zone acj3÷;g the stret from the project. Next slide. And notably, on the site you have the Laurel Heights childcare center. That is also in the air pollution exposure zone. Next slide. S the project going to do . The cable you see here is in your packet. They show you the trucks that were coming to the site back when best buy was operating. There were 14 a day. That idled and average of 140 minutes per day. The new whole foods by contrast is going to be adding 23 trucks idling for 230 minutes and notably these trucks have what are called top mounted refrigeration units essentially refrigerators that burn diesel exhaust all the time to keep contents of the trucks cold and we can see here, that when you consider those there idling and emitting diesel exhaust for over 800 minutes per day. Next slide please. Very quickly these are the customer vehicles. Another source of emissions. You have got according to then applicants consultant there were about 2600 trips per day when it was best buy now there is going over 10,000 saturdays and over 9,000 on sundays. Next slide please. Heres that information reduced into an easy to read table i hope. What you are, when you compare what is proposed to the whole foods to what a was going on with best buy youre going from to 23. Idling to 810. Customer vehicles an increase by orders of magnitude most notably that bottom road annual vehicle miles traveled 2. 5 million going up to over 8 million. Next slide please. Heres the kicker. Theres no best buy there. Its been closed for over three years. I will explain later, they require you to look at the environment as it exists now. Notqyt6wok based on some hypothl historical environmenta environy have existed some years ago. What you are actually looking at in terms of Environmental Impacts goes from zero trucks, zero trus and zero Diesel Engine idling time to 23 trucks idling for 810 minutes and customer trips from zero up to the very high numbers on the right and again, annual vehicle miles traveled to over 8 million. Next slide please. So were asking question again can you say just based on that, can you say with certainty, that there is no possibility of any kind that the emissions of diesel exhaust and other toxic air contaminants from the trucks and customer vehicles coming to this site is not going to have any impact on this air pollution exposure zone given the already elevated cancer risk that People Living there experience . It is the added cancer risk. We put that question to a in sac sacramento. I want to show you the slide to show you the gentleman we consulted has been doing this over 30 years. And, his cd is in the file we submit that he is an ably
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.