Supervisor tang supervisor wiener supervisor yee madam president we have quorum. Thank you ladies and gentlemen, can you please join us and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, madam clerk any communications. I have no communications madam president. Colleagues, any changes to the regular Board Meeting minutes of october 68 sienna motion by supervisor mar and seconded by supervisor christensen colleagues well take that without objection. Those minutes passes unanimously theyll be passed unanimously after. Madam clerk can we please go to our terrors item the the first order of business is today is appearance of the honorable mayor ed lee no questions from supervisors the mayor may address the board up to five minutes. Unfortunately, the mayor couldnt join us today all to taken a motion to a data of december 1st Board Meeting is there a motion supervisor cowen and supervisor mar colleagues well take that without objection. The that motion carries unanimously madam clerk go the consent agenda. Items 1, 2, 3 comprise those items considered route if a member observe it will be separate. Roll call vote. Commissioner avalos supervisor breed supervisor campos supervisor christensen supervisor cowen supervisor farrell supervisor kim supervisor mar supervisor tang supervisor wiener supervisor yee there are 11 is. Those ordinancess final psa unanimously madam clerk enough time next item a resolution for the resolution of intention to establish infrastructure financing district number 2 resolutions one dash 10 and other for the city as a port of San Francisco. Colleagues, can we take that same house, same call . Well take that without objection. The resolution is adopted unanimously next item, please. Item 5 for the ordinance of stacey a citywide sustainability fee and is it your understanding the application of existing impact fee with some exemptions while the Transportation Sustainability fee remains operative to add definitions clarifying Affordable Housing and homeless shelter exemption from the sustainability fees making conforming amendment to the planning code and affirming the ceqa in making other appropriate finding. Supervisor campos. Thank you madam president as i note the last time we voted it is important for us to hold developers account when it comes to the impacts that the developments have on Public Transportation i do think that we as a board have made a mistake and left a lot of money on the tally ill be that concludes my report this today i belive that this is an issue probation officer needs to be revisited by this board as this board is new at the studied Going Forward that is one issue we need to revisit and make sure that the next time we hold the developers the for the impacts on public transit. Thank you supervisor campos supervisor christensen. I just wanted to say inaudible par im grateful to supervisor wiener for getting this rolling and all who support 2 we recognize the impact on transportation in the dense neighborhood those things will be hench h helpful thanks to the proprietors and grateful were moving forward with it. Thank you seeing no other names on the roster colleagues, can we take that same house, same call . Well take that without objection. The ordinance passed unanimously next item, please. Item of a resolution retroactively have the Sheriffs Department to is there anyone from the public that would like to speak . A nine hundred mentally ill crime rent program Fund Administrative code by the state and community corrects through the Recidivism Fund july 1st, 2015, through 02018. Same house, same call . Well take that without objection. The resolution is adopted unanimously item 7. To retroactively authorize the accept and expend of 12 thousand from roommate hero to sponsor mayor ed lee action tour permit 22, 2015 and june 2015. Same house, same call . Well take that without objection. The resolution is adopted unanimously next item. Item 8 is a resolution to approve the establishment by the Public Utilities commission of its commercial paper notes program in an agency congratulate not to exceed 90 millions for the construction replacement of existing water and Power Facilities under the power enterprise for the acquisition and installation or rehabilitation of facilities for Renewable Energy and energy commercialism same house, same call . Well take that without objection. The resolution is adopted unanimously next item, please. Item 9 resolution to meeting authorize the department of the environment to accept and expend is 17 hundred thousand plus from inc. To disposal for household Hazardous Waste from 2015 to 2016. Same house, same call . Well take that without objection. The resolution is adopted unanimously next item to retroactively authorize the punting to accept and expend a three hundred and 24 thousand grant to participate in a program enhance the sfraefk aids program and monitoring the evaluation from april 2015 to 2016. Same house, same call . Well take that without objection. The resolution is adopted unanimously next item item 11 resolution to authorize the Public Health to submit an application to continue to representative the funds for the ryan white from the Health Services administration and requesting 16. 6hundred hiv relieve Program Funding for the metropolitan area from 2016 to 2017. Same house, same call . Well take that without objection. The resolution is adopted unanimously next item, please. Item 12 to authorize the Public Utilities commission to accept and expend a 5 million from the San Francisco General Hospital for the procurement of furniture fixtures and information to this for the mr. Brown and Mark Zuckerberg and naming various places through the acute care and trauma building. Same house, same call . Well take that without objection. The resolution is adopted unanimously item 13 and ordinance to amend the Building Code and planning code for the list of elephants for a merger or between to require an affidavit and notice if the State Hospital or bathrooms are removed and affirmed the ceqa determination and other appropriate finding and supervisor wiener. Thank you madam president colleagues today before us is legislation to make sure that all tenants in San Francisco are referring notice as the owner of their unit is seeking a permit to demolish and or more the unions so they willal know and contest the demolition and the removal of their home right now in San Francisco for attendance who live in legal units it is from the owner is proposing to diminish their units the tenant gets full notice and to contest the demolition permit, however, for illegal units including the tens of thoits thousands of inlaw unit the landlords could go seek and obtain a demolition permit for the unit without providing notice whatsoever to the tenants and so the tenants may find out well, after the fact and after it is too late to appeal that demolition alter extraordinarily from the dpw or the board of appeals this inequality is unfair when you have people paying republicans for decades at risk of losing their homes without notice whatsoever a because that unit is not legally recorded in San Francisco this is not right and close the loop this legislation requires that the residents of illegal units receive the same notification that others attendance receive in various languages and posted so if they choose and presuming theyll choose to fight for their home and be able to remain in their homes during the housing crisis to keep them stable and this helps us to do that i want to thank Building Inspection Commission for providing support this as a good step in the right direction colleagues, i ask for your support. Thank you, supervisor wiener colleagues, can we take that same house, same call . Well take that without objection. The ordinance pass on the First Reading unanimously madam clerk next item. 14 for the administrative code for the preference 2, 3, 4 allocating the city housing unit and second to tenants evicted in the ellis act to create a third preference for residents in the neighborhood where the Affordable Housing is located to make conforming amendments for the administrative code and planning code to affirm the ceqa and make other appropriate vrntsz. Commissioner avalos. Oh, supervisor cowen. Thank you thank you very much thank you i just want to take a moment and just express gratitude to all but Community Leader that work with us on the legislation i want to recognize our staff that have been with us both in my office anticipate supervisor president london breeds office we both care, he deeply about this legislation as native san franciscans this legislation will effect the communities that we represent and i also want to remind that my colleagues remember were not only district supervisors by citywide supervisors we have a responsibility to continue to protect the interests of all san franciscans i also know there are many people in the communities that are here today that have paid not only in blood, sweat, and tears but many people have lost their family members due to displacement and people work towards the Housing Preference those in the chamber and cant be with us San Francisco is a unique and desire for its neighborhoods those neighborhoods will continue to lose their soul continue to lose their characterization as population continue to dwindle if we dont step forward and stop the hemorrhaging of low income san franciscans and most important to insure they can stay in the neighborhoods and raised their families and where they choose to remain were not only seoul just talking about the africanamerican communities this is a community that gets the most voice and attention because of the horrible population numbers that have drilling down many of us in the chamber have talked about those alarming rates of africanamericans weve lost but also the latinos brothers and sisters not long ago they stood in the chasm asking for you support and i was proud to support the members of the mission they pushed towards the moratorium to stop the pressure that is forcing them out and many of the api somalians have come into the chasm and we have yet to produce something to help them all the low income residence in the city are struggling to stay in San Francisco i have the as to his four largest hountsz in district 10 by the caucus and significant population their cupped by aging and san franciscans everyone is struggling i venture the district has one of the most diverse parts not by accident but because it is the last parts of San Francisco that are affordable so this is real this issue were dealing with laeshth issues i canned express how much this legislation means to thousands of san franciscans but the bossing of people that come to committee. repeated. the constitution of the united states. Over the last month to testify for over an hour with their expressions of personally how much this legislation will mean to them this is because were talking about the legislation weve left hand to thousands of hours of testimony from people in this chamber crying for support and help what are we are doing for themer were doing for the families what are we are doing for the families weve pushed out during the redevelopment those members that listened for hours what are we are doing for them this is not a perfect solution didnt answer everything and address all the problems were dealing with when it comes to displacement but it is the best first step we we have to take right here today and must act now not time to continue to continue to push the can down the road i ask you think about the thousands of san franciscans that line up day to day year by year four generations packed their bags and left San Francisco how can we continue to sit back and do nothing so colleagues you hear the passion in any voice i respectfully ask youre showcasing support for that transformation active piece of legislation thank you. clapping. supervisor president london breeds. Thank you supervisor cowen really articulating exactly the sentiments of myself and many others who are part of a number of communities that have watched over the years as members have been adapted out of this city i dont know who is winning the lottery i know who is losing africanamericans and an alarming rate has left the city and time after time and the officials in the city say we care about the Africanamerican Community and the challenges they face and here is an opportunity for those who care to do something about that growing up in the western edition communities almost before i knew who was i combhi who the redevelopments agency say they destroyed the western edition i watched as homes were removed and wondered why kim my neighbor was noting in San Francisco and not play outside together i wonder why they were teacher of the year down building with fields with vacancy i wonder why people in any communities explicit live there this is what the problem is we have far too long neglected to try to do something initiative progressive about the issue this is not a new problem but this is and this is not a new solution a new solution in San Francisco in new york they have neighborhood preference basically since is lasts 1970s as far back and San Francisco time and time again the leaders choose to side nothing we lose not only africanamericans from the city but also a trooif microorganism we have used and continue to use outdated housing policies from the 1960s and 70s to try to address what is a 2015 housing crisis if we want to continue to support our communities if we want to continue to make sure that we have a trifling africanamerican population and we think continue to call our city a diverse city we need to do something no, this is not perfect legislation and not solve the entire problem but a huge, huge step in the right direction i want to thank the malice for helping to put together this legislation i want to thank the mayor for having the courage to actually bring this legislation forward and thank you to supervisor cowen for her advocacy and supervisor wiener and supervisor christensen for being cosponsors on this legislation this legislation is about doing when is right and putting legislation to dealing with a problem that sadly has gun on the neglect of the africanamerican communities and the neglect of allowing folks to have access to Affordable Housing when we go to folks in the community and is support us support this Affordable Housing build more Affordable Housing unfortunately now, when i do that people are saying why should ii cant live there my friends cant we cant get assess to the housing across the street from where we grew up any kids want to live in San Francisco born and raised qualified for this Affordable Housing yet they cant get access to Affordable Housing they supported and fought for and continue to push for thats a real problem so today colleagues, i hope that you will consider supporting this legislation the time is now we cant wait we cant continue we cant continue to sit back and do nothing meanwhile were building and, of course not enough especially not enough of Affordable Housing we have weve got a lot more work to do in order to address Affordable Housing crisis but this is a way to make sure that people in those communities know that they have a right to be there they have access and especially we build and this is for you, we can final mean it thank you clapping clapping. commissioner avalos. Thank you, colleagues. I was struck about the story in the chronicle how i wasnt surprised but struck by the nature of the story one percent of the bmr are not assessed but is africanamericans deplorable we see that we knew about the disparities in San Francisco there are recently but when it comes to the africanamerican communities the disparities are desire and we have a responsibility to deal with that i see this legislation as a step in the right direction i believe this legislation has impacts on other districts and it is almost were trying to do a jigsaw puzzle with different sets vpdz i believe this is moving forward especially to look at how we might reverse some of the disparities were seeing in San Francisco especially with workingclass and locating africanamericans and other communities of color ive been concerned that the discussion of this legislation it could at times pit communities against one another unfortunately, a theres a limit supply of housing across the city and it effects different population and that is something i think we cant avoid but to me i see that when we were failing so much the africanamerican communities we see that the Africanamerican Community is organized around promoting this legislation and see it as with an tool one to lessen the disparities and willing to support it we have many things to address the issue what struck me as well as about the article no real clear assessment of why were at that number for africanamericans in the affordable market we need to be honest as a city why those numbers are low why what is the racism in place and is barriers outside of the community and what are the barriers people find within their communities that prevents us from above and beyond when the Mayors Office of housing to insure that people can find heirs and the programs to get ready for housing that is Available Online this is not explored or discussed were not looking how to have the connection between what is offered were in real desire need to make those changes as soon as possible so i hope this legislation though i believe that is somewhat flawed can help us in a new direction to put greater resources in supporting the communities that have historically and immediately been burger to assess in the bmr market i do appreciate supervisors supervisor president london breeds and supervisor cowen for bringing this legislation for working with the Mayors Office on it i think im not totally comfortable but will be supporting it i realize this is much we need to do to lessen the disparity thank you. Mr. Chair ill remind the audience addable support use youre showcasing fingers. Thank you, mr. Chair im strongly supportive of this legislation as brought to committee and proud to support it from the getgo and thank you to sxhopdz and supervisor cowen in particular their, their extraordinary leadership for moving forward this matters we are finally starting to increase the amount of Affordable Housing in San Francisco and opening itch more the city sponsored projects with the nonprofit partners were also seeing more and more offsite inclusion housing and goes to accelerate as the shipyard commissioners, on that motion into existence and Treasure Island and the other projects that will deliver a significant number of belowmarketrate housing we have to be prepared and frankly not prepared ray we have a lottery system that is completely and utterly broken some communities that are do not do well and we need to make sure that everyone in this city is able to assess and have a realistic shot at assessing our Affordable Housing if every single neighborhood in the city and everyone this legislation will help move us in that direction people need to be confident it Affordable Housing is in their neighborhood and right now frankly people dont have that confidence it is absolutely the case we need to be building Affordable Housing in every single neighborhood in San Francisco and every single neighborhood needs to have Affordable Housing because their people that are struggling in all parts of this city and frankly this legislation will help to builds support to create Affordable Housing in all neighborhoods in this city if people have confidence the Affordable Housing being build down the street is actually for them and their neighbors their going to be more supportive and well have much, much more of a possibility of getting board based support more Affordable Housing that is equally distributed around this city i also want to say in terms of Lgbt Community we are finally going to be seeing those 55 unit projects one hundred 10 units of low income Senior Housing with the focus on lgbt seniors open up in the near future and make sure that our residents have a fair shot of getting into that housing the timing couldnt be better to make sure that the lottery for the project is done appropriately with a neighborhood preference and so im strog supportive thank you supervisor cowen and supervisor president london breeds ill be supporting this strongly today. Supervisor tang thank you very much i want to thank you supervisor president london breed and supervisor cowen their working hard and piggy backing off of what supervisor wiener said to make sure that the people in the neighborhood can access the avenue in their neighborhood i think that the main point of concern i have there are some neighbors were not seeing that level of Affordable Housing development and that is something that separately im working on since coming into officer as i speak ill ask my aid to place on the projector for you the map that shows the upcoming pipeline up through 2020 of the Affordable Housing in San Francisco so sfgovtv if you could show this a lot of the left side in district 4 we have 7 units of belowmarketrate housing coming online in the next year and prolonged up up to 2020 so to i appreciate what the supervisors are doing to make sure that the residence are staying in their homes in baufrts there are many, many neighborhoods including all of district 4 if their displaced they will see 60 percent the Affordable Housing taken away from their preference and so what does is say about other neighborhoods that residents come from and get evicted theyll be pushed at the very bottom the waiting list i agree with the supervisors were citywide supervisors need to help everyone that gets displaced no matter what neighborhood thats indicative of the dilemmas that some of the neighborhoods face including my own milestone working on trying to get the support more Affordable Housing to be built in the neighborhoods despite the neighborhood option so really i think id like to propose 3 separates amendments we it can take 3 separate votes one of them is the Mayors Office of housing to do some annual reporting the reason ill propose i want to have a better sense of what is going on there and how many even planners are applying under the cop, o m i ellis and what are the district where the Affordable Housing is located where are they selected from the lottery and if they were were they able to operate in the bmr units and mount other pertinent information that the Mayors Office of housing that can inform our efforts moving forward to better help the various communities that should be assessing those affordable units this is the First Amendment i can go through the other two first. Commissioner walker why not youre showcasing motions you want to make as a whole and entertain conversations to have a discussion around others amendments and take them one at a time. The Second Amendment to add to the second category the definition of displaced tenants educate 2 a tenant in San Francisco after january 10th received a meows notice that his or her landlords gets the units under the section of the rent ordinance to create or adding in the o m i eviction into the second educate keeping in lien with the ellis act evictions at 20 percent and as well as the ellis act provisions of the 10 year retainedcy and the 100 percent if so being considered whether youre showcasing ellis act evicted or being displaced because of a owner movein eviction our someone that needs the help from the city there shouldnt be a dimension between the two types id like to see us add in the o m i for the displaced tenant and thirdly, speaking to my main point earlier the amendment to decrease the neighborhood preference down to thirty percent i was supportive of the original version with the 25 percent i know that absolutely is something we can include as a preference but if were going to increase it to 40 percent on top of the displaced category of 80 percent and on top of the cops were effectively shutting out and taking away the 60 percent of affordable units that is open in for any of the other displaced tenants so those are the 3 amendments im proposing and we can take all 3 amendments separately with separate vote. Thank you supervisor katie tang well do that lets keep going with comments supervisor yee. Thank you very much im also want to show my appreciation to supervisor cowen and supervisor breed and bringing this issue up this basically due time and basically several people have mentioned this is the perfect solution i agree with several the commenters this is not the perfect solution, however, when we if were looking at correcting the wrong that was done this solution is better than doing nothing i 80 want to make that statement thank you for at least pushing us in the right direction we need to continue looking at Better Solutions in the future but we cannot wait for that that to come we need to move now ill not be supporting some of the supervisor tangs amendments that she introduced i also wanted to say that i wont push this discussion today since there is a duplicate file sitting at committee right now if we truly building in the neighborhood preference we need to focus on what the neighborhood is and not get confused with the district ill take this as an for example, i take one end of district 7 and then basically have some Affordable Housing like possible near city college and 3 miles away is still my district and the People Living 3 miles away dont consider the other area their neighborhood so it dans sdnt making make sense to improve this supporting the neighborhood preference and the way ill start the discussion to say wherever a project is built lets provide a radius that make sense in which people will consider that area is their neighborhood not something that is three or four miles away maybe other district make sense to have a district it is much smaller and several large district not fair for something in my district to happen and a few plain clothes away they cant move into the same neighborhood thats my concern and hoping well have acknowledge open discussion in the future otherwise as we discuss this im hoping to support the original amendments today. Supervisor mar. I know this item is in the context of other large items that are on our agenda and im thinking a lot about Development Projects that have a displacing impacts and long term creative multi strategies to mr. Chair the lowerincome communities of color to xhooez points i dont want to do something that is better than nothing and to supervisor breed question of who is winning in this lottery for extremely limited Affordable Housing slots im not sure and who is losing yes africanamericans are losing but also chicanos and latinos from the mission lowerincome filipinos from south of market and many, many others groups too i guess i worry when we create a preference system that is based on a couple of spiritually districts were losing out on the strategies of fighting displacement and unfortunately, the solution to displacement is to stop displacement not to rebuilding department paifrg as a number of groups have said i worry that fighting over the crumbles of Affordable Housing and giving me preferences to different categories it is not neighborhood but district were talking about and if only 4 major spiritually districts were talking about right now and in the near future as projects in the pipeline 4 districts of setting up a system that pits people of lowerincome people of color and supervisor tang said a lot of considerations needs to be made on the west side i represent as well as i want to say when i looked did Affordable Housing on geary the core net theatre i asked about 10 preferences can be given to district 5 and district one close to the area the response from the Mayors Office of housing was fair housing laws and is huds and others low prevent that i know that as legal question from the memo i want more findings of that as we receive the cautionary memo i know in this legislation some of that is still up in the air if federal funding vofdz or states housing laws say for example, a district 8 not all district 8 are affluent or white people but ill say from the preference is given for district 8 and not to other stlaerl displaced and other areas that makes me question the 25 and 40 percent i guess we have a danger of San Francisco as foreheads blackwell on the foundation convened a meeting a couple of days ago thai showed you that San Francisco has ground grown to the majority off people is now going down so that it is a total reversal of the diversity thats groin grown in the city well see because of different housing policies and cost of living that change in the demographics of the people not only color but a rapid desegregation i fear that the proposal like this without carefully and thoughtful approaches like chinatown and other neighborhoods that we may be adding to a rapid desegregation of housing and fooufr u fooufr that push out of people of color i support of Racial Justice i have serious concerns and hopefully slow down and perhaps continue to discuss a lot of the different items supervisor tangs amendments im supportive of the first and third but carving out noting another preference for owner moveins i see that for the west side but wondering how it this impacts on the people that have been evicted in others i think we need more time to understand the implications i appreciate the approach from sxhoepd and supervisor cowen but i support the multi racial in the broader context of building more housing for the displaced community that are all around us thats my 0. 02 in the context of this displacement and development right now. Supervisor campos. Thank you very much mr. Chair and all the members of the community for this item i guess this is not a simple issue i have a lot of mixed feelings and thoughts maybe none will be happy with what i have to say let me say this ive come to this board asking the board for help at different times in my district in the mission and so i am very much aware of why supervisor president london breed and supervisor cowen have working hard on this issue and let me say it is not entirely clear when you accountability the neighborhood preference in terms of the specific impact that it may have on one district and neighborhood and part of challenge we have with the neighborhood preference legally we have limit onyx from my district in the mission which is what i generally lands on this issue i think that the con seis sews people want to see a better preference people affiliate neighborhood say 40 percent neighborhood preference is not enough for the mission i actually think that important purposes of the project in the mission that is not enough is it should be higher i think that 40 percent is probably at this point as high as we can go in a way that is legally defenseable and if i could sit here and say i could defend 60 or 70 percent or 80 percent i would like make that motion im not in a place to do that i recognize what many of the advocates have said which is that in some respect make a maybe a better approach or bitter way to look at this not a onesizefitsall but perhaps variations for each neighborhood and within the district perhaps a neighborhood with a within each district i recognize that with that said, i want to speak to members of the public of my Community Working on that issue for the last few weeks i was disturbed to read the paper today and the way that issue has come across it seems like that there is different groups within San Francisco that are being pit against each other and as a gay latino man it has been especially difficult to see that if you read that art it comes across as members of the Latino Community coming out against something that is beneficial to the Africanamerican Community that is problematic for me and real concern and im not sure what the right policy outreach is im going or im not sure how far we can go in terms of neighborhood preference and i think that at some point procedurally this is done and duplicating the file so we have well remain something p to work on moving forward make sense and i would urge both supervisor president london breed and supervisor cowen and the folks that or who are on the other side of that issue to figure out how to Work Together on that piece what bothers me about some of the way that comes across i dont know what will work i also know that even if you dont agree with it for elected leaders in the Africanamerican Community and many members of the africanamerican communities this is something that the priority for them and just like the mission came here and said whether you agree with the cost or the moratorium or not give us the benefit of the dough and have us have some say over our own destiny i think consistent with that approach to me it make sense that even though this is not clear how this will cut into the the ends have members of the Africanamerican Community including the elected leadership we want to try this well support that it is in that spirits that i will be supporting this i think that it make sense that we would give this a shot and it does bother me actually that some of us came here and required support what we minded in the mission yet not seemed like were doing that here this is the problem for me and i think that if whatever happens out of this i hope what happens every group the africanamerican are is chineseamerican or the Latino Community the an low communities you all of us figure out how to move together collectively so it didnt come across as divided i know that is a real problem and i know that the folks that are coming from the mission and chinatown to advocate a different approach are doing so in the interest of everyones interest but i think that right now that is not how it has come across im committed with working with with supervisor president london breed and supervisor cowen to move forward in a way that allows us to not only you know be united but come cross as united i dont think were there the second point i will make this is where i have to be honest to members of the public that are coming here to support this i will be voting for this but lets be realistic about what this means if you really care about what is happening to the Africanamerican Community in San Francisco and all you do is supported this policy and push for this then we have failed the Africanamerican Community this is a small percentage of a much large problem that could potentially be impacted and it is significant but if you care about San Francisco making a priority of keeping africanamericans in San Francisco and all we do is this policy i, i have to tell you the outcome will not be different than that we have right now and anyone respectfully anyone that tells us otherwise in my humble opinion is not giving you the full picture of whats happening if you want to keep africanamericans it is not enough in this city not enough to do what were doing here you have to do something about most of developments being approved by this board of supervisors and this mayor are not building housing for low income people and workingclass and middleincome the fact that the inclusionary rules that the developer building the luxurious projects are asked to pay for 10 to 15 percent affordable and what that number is higher it is not clear when those will be built if you care about the Africanamerican Community you have to address the fact that San Francisco and this mayor are talking about spending hundreds of Million Dollars dollars on a new jail and one millions for each cell and that new jail which will make that cell more expensive than a affordable unit for workingclass families in the city all of that has to be addressed if you care about the future of the Africanamerican Community clapping. so i will be supporting this effort but i will i have to tell you this i will be coming back to this issue of how were helping africanamerican stay i have a year two months left in any term and im committing myself doing everything we can to make sure we have not just africanamericans we have latinos and asianamericans we have workingclass people we be ann loss and teachers and every Single Person who wants to stay in San Francisco it is not just about this vote ill be voting to support this but reminding us as we move forward if he care do do the right thing by this Africanamerican Community and other communities that it didnt end up with this the on the thick ill say and ask all the folks who have been lobbying and advocating for this is that i would encourage eir receptionist of the confines appreciable within the brown act and the laws and i will ask supervisor cowen and supervisor president london breed and a to reach out to the community the folks who are on the ods today so we can have an inclusive discussion Going Forward to the extents i can be involved im committed to doing that i think we need everyone such as as soon as possible to be on the on the same page. Supervisor christensen. So our housing situation is an Steel Complex weve looked at maps with the Affordable Housing is planned at any office studying i know where displacement is occurring in high concentration where there are concentrations of qualifying residents issues like transit and jobs and schools a lot of complex abashes a at the heart is a simple sidewalks that is losing one home is stressful and difficult but losing ones neighborhood a correction to friends, schools, shopping, cultural activities and familiar environment is devastating combining this measure with the opportunities of the housing bonds weve just passed give us a chance to more carefully consider the fair and equal dispercent of Affordable Housing around the city and help disperse the facilities with the housing projects the good news is that as a city we will build more housing weve just passed the largest effort to date in this direction never enough but. Huge step forward we need to locate the housing equally across the city so displaced residents regardless of neighborhood can stay home and for that reason ill be supporting the legislation as well. Supervisor breed. Thank you i appreciate the comments of many of my colleagues here today and i just wanted to talk about supervisor tangs amendments i am supportive of annual reporting i think this is really important i know for certainty that annual reporting exists with the Mayors Office of housing and the Current System we definitely could provide language in the resolution that could make sure that they do a better job as it relates to neighborhoods preference and ellis act evictions we can have a better understanding of how who is taking advantage of this housing and how to make the legislation better as far as adding a category im not poster of that without a lengthy discussions in the Land Use Commission talk of adding o m i did was in the language and removed for more lengthy discussion at a later date im not closing the door to including o m ii want to make sure that that discussion takes place we can include the predicament language as it relates to owner movein evictions so and wont be supporting that amendment and definitely not decreasing the percentage if to thirty percent so colleagues, i again, i will support the First Amendment but the other two are amendments that i actually cant support today. Thank you. Supervisor kim. Thank you. I know that quite a bit of dialogue and efforts have down or impound into this for neighborhood preference i want to say he support some of the Overall Concept of why we put neighborhoods preference in avenue, i get that people want to stay in the neighborhoods and communities their part of familiar routine and friendship and social services and patterns that is disruptive which one moves from one part of the city to another, in fact, one of the things ive learned around the displacement of housing in chinatown i one by one replacement housing was not enough when we offered the replacement housing the attendance tells us im part of a community i know if i dont get out of bed my neighbor will check on me to see how im doing those are the concrete things that people have when theyre part of a community that go beyond the replacement housing i had concerns around the preferences because i know that the district i represent is building a disprompt of the Affordable Housing in San Francisco and, in fact, our last housing balance report in september that was compiled and accustomed by the Planning Department 50 percent of the Affordable Housing is in the district in the south of market and tenderloin that is a boon and benefit to the residents of my district well sure up to 40 percent of units in the neighborhood go to the residents i know that residents in the tenderloin and south of market and Treasure Island support this for that reason i just want to make sure that there ashlt unnecessary impacts in other districts for mother not as much support housing is produced one district is not more deferring as another and hopefully, this encourages our supervisors to make sure that more of is built in their district looking at the numbers of the residents you know our ratio is large represent of the rest of the city 34 asian and 167 percent latino if we are concerned with assuring a diversity of residents that are getting priority more Affordable Housing in our district we working hard to make sure that our residents apply more Affordable Housing i like many of the colleagues will be supporting this i supported this out of Land Use Commission for the respect that both supervisor cohen and supervisor president london breeds did i certainly understand the outcome and we have a vast under representation of africanamerican and latino and our 100 percent Affordable Housing not run by the city i want to see that increase im worried about the legislation wont would have the impact that is deserved it didnt matter if you have preference if youre not applying the city needs to being able be sure that residents building if they apply theyll get it ive heard from residents they dont apply theyve lack faith in the lowest system if your name is not in the pool youll not get picked; right . Two weve invested in the application progression when i worked at chinatown cdc we were door knocking and buying newspapers and opening our doors those applications are very complicated i can fill it out for myself without a ton of guidance but we need to make sure that we invest in those type of infrastructure so for every Single Community and neighborhood south of market unfortunately an organization that helps many of the south of market and tenderloin residents and many residents want Affordable Housing because of that kind of support and it is important that we look at the system and what is disadvantageousing certain folks do we need to work on the history and taking care of the conviction and supervisor cowen and i coauthored and what type of work for the residents to make them giggle and building more Affordable Housing clearly not enough if folks feel they dont have the opportunities of housing in the city i think that is important to allow this to move forward to have the outcomes we want to see and whether it will achieve those but which is why ill be supporting supervisor tangs third amendment to make sure we get the data to make sure we were getting the outcomes i had one question to supervisor tang on the addition of the organization m i to the second category to the second preference and i just time to clarify that this is up to 20 percent . Of the displaced your excluding the o m i along with the tenants. Thats correct not changing the overall but including the 20 percent that i know that looking at the data we have a tremendous amount of owner moveins revocations on the west side of the city that bring more equality to the perch system. Thank you, supervisor kim supervisor campos. Thank you madam president on the amendments by supervisor tang i will be supportive of the amendment on reporting but i will not be supportive of the other amendments as i noted for place like mission for us lower the percentage from 40 to to in my verify is the wrong approach for us and werent to the owner moveins evictions he appreciate the spirit and intent but a large discussion that needs to be had around that issue i know there is a framework in place with that discussion because it may be that in the end what commissioner chung is proposing is something that is included but i think there needs to be a larger strategy and quite frankly a large strategy that addresses the metabolic evictions the one thing i forgot to mention it is important ill ask especially supervisor president london breed and supervisor cowen as we move forward and sort of working on this what you look at what is happening in places like the mission you have and the latino communities in particular you have latinos making up 15 percent of population and yet only benefiting from 5. 4 percent of city units and 11 percent in privately Development Unit i think that one of the challenges that i see is not just the rules in terms of preferences but also how it is that members of that communities and other communities are figuring out what is available and the outreach that needs to be done i actually think one the things that necessarily has to happen the city needs to invest resources for better outreach in theirselves communities and especially in the latino communities, the africanamerican and the Chinese Community we need to figure out how we reach out and make sure as those rules change that members of the neighborhoods in those communities said they can benefit from those policy changes thank you. Thank you supervisor cohen. Thank you very much and thank you for the support colleagues looks like were in a fairly good position a couple of things i want to acknowledge questions and issues and also want to speak to the audience members we want to acknowledge people that came out to the Land Use Commission twice to hear this item and focus on this item and joined us in the chamber today stand up and give us the board of supervisors an opportunity to acknowledge you thank you for being here those folks that came out to champion this issue our incredible and very much an International Part of this movement to move forward thank you very much for being here clapping. the other next set of folks we need to recognize are my legislative aide to me and supervisor president london breeds office and Conner Johnson and others are incredible in move people here and educate them and fighting back the lies and is rumors that are out there as well supervisor kim through the chair to supervisor kim i want to pub u talk about the issues their quit on point and i want to also educate the folks that are here about what we are already doing in terms of tirz i got a couple of hundred thousand dollars to go to an Advertising Campaign and a media market okay to reach people that grew up in San Francisco and are no longer here or are here struggling and advertising in a meaningful way and in multiple languages so were not excluding everyone that is the first time we as a body have taken our money and put it in allocated in such a way to help with the outreach you talk about the outcome weve benefit working on the Mayors Office of housing is codifying how those developers advertise now as youre showcasing advertising in sf magazine i dont know how many people reads sf magazine im using that as an example were not doing going to reach the urban market how to you put together rules those personalities well come and go but in the codification the malice a set number of wards words and pictures whatever it maybe were actually working on that to make sure we getting the advertising where we need to be advertising and no one gets left behind and the application process weve done a tremendous job i want to acknowledge one of the my champions kathy davis and kathy didnt say but she is the executive directors of the George B Davis Senior Center were building thousands of units of Senior Housing which is not enough we need more but the thousands we have shes singlehanded collected 4 thousand applications for 2 thousand units so my point is when you puts diligent work and a little bit of dollars together but will reach people you will get them to turnout and fill out the application and can change the tide weve spent time talking about ousted migration and what it comes to in migration retention that is just as important as speaking to the makers of this policy as we continue to talk about housing for all and for every person in the chamber that voted for prop a thank you very much youve significantly helped us to build Public Housing part of the Affordable Housing and inside of San Francisco noted directly related to this particular piece of policy but we talk about the housing we cant forgot billion those people in housing and prop a is second to none daily and police chief both irs that are open and so as we continue to talk about supervisor campos about housing and in the mission and the dimes were most certainly to make sure we are talking about those in all kinds of housing whether subsidize and section 8 and market rate housing not marketrate but belowmarketrate housing inclusionary, however, we want to category no one gets left behind now could you dont i think so supervisor tangs prospective i dont supports the neighborhoods decrease in the neighborhood preference he agree with many of the folks that came out in Public Comment and if we could get more maybe well do it and looking for a way to get a higher percentage onehalf not found that so it is i think goes against the desire of not only this body but the general public to decrease the percentage for for neighborhoods preference and also during to the hearings hearings we heard in Land Use Commission i chair we heard from dozens of people that wanted a neighborhood preference one the key components to reward neighborhoods that have accepted the development and Affordable Housing in other neighborhoods so hey, you want to put people into in action go talk to the developers and get this moving over west side it is not fair the district have to share the shoulder responsibility we all must share that responsibility for decades the west side of the city has had a adopted a not in my backyard but now were changing it approximately will on this board on the west side to begin to see the see change and it is you know if you talk about anyone that grew up in San Francisco none thought well be developing in the shipyard toxic maybe property but here we are buildings 12 thousand 5 hundred units on the west side those developers find. Way and this legislation is going to insure hopefully b be in place the folks on the west side that may not benefit as wild as we want today but in a position to benefit from it in the future thats why were making the decisions that has the best interests of people in the city we cant make a decision now to limit you have the future we cant see those units didnt mean they are not in our future i believe this legislation is significant and will fairly benefit all of San Francisco i do support the third amendment that requires the Mayors Office of housing to report yearly the number of migration and preferences eligible for the demographic because if youre not counting it and not keeping track we need to do a better Due Diligence of how to keep tracking track alcohol, tobacco firearms units like the Police Officer how many times theyre stopping people the same rational notice the po a will write me gary in the examiner will write me changing brurndz this is interesting go changing the neighborhood boundary from the supervisorial to neighborhood it looks good this is one the most sounds data driven piece of policy this body has seen in a long time thank you charlie he has a fantastic model if we narrow and make that legislation and i applicable to not only the Baby Community that excludes people in our best interests to stick with the supervisorial indict and i want to remind the folks their made up of folks and keep them intact folks take a moment and shed light on a couple of misconceptions thank you for listening and thank you, colleagues im grateful for your partnership we cant do it without you. Thank you supervisor cowen clapping. and supervisor wiener. Im not sure how to follow that ill do my very best i wanted to i spoke with supervisor tang and ill be supporting this amendment and be supporting the owner movein amendment we adapted i dont know if it was last year or the year before the legislation for people evicted in the ellis act that was important but people that are evicted many owner moveins solemnly swear are not at fault and they deserve preference as well in addition he appreciate what supervisor tang did in including that permission for the people lived in the united for at least 10 years so a longerterm tenants will probably be protected if from the rent control and the preference they deserve ill be supporting that not supporting the amendment to reduce the percent from thirty to 40. Thank you, supervisor wiener supervisor kim. Thank you. I you just want probation officer reiterate that i as will that will supporting the two amendments that supervisor tang has movtd on o m i and at recording i want to give the neighborhoods preference category at 40 percent a chance and will be that concludes my report that as say, i think that would be helpful for the board to hear the comparison of evictions over the last 10 years one thousand plus ellis act and owner moveins sleeksz looking at the district particularly along the west side and saets suicides 2 to 3 times the number of o m is as ellis act 2 hss hundred mrs. But more owner moveins and 62 over the last 200 and 24 owner moveins evictions and district 740 ellis act eviction but one and 32 owner moveins and district 10 only 35 ellis act evictions. Many more owner moveins on this 42 and one and 60 owner movein evicts and the other districts their intended to be more o m i given the nature there is more disparities continue the two i think that particular on the west side and the saets sector you will see two to three times more moveins no, not at all evictions not a reason to put them into categories some of the concerns from the vehicles there are so many theyre worried about that flooding i think that category so with that said, i dont see a policy reason to differentiate it was an the two evicts and i appreciate supervisor tang including the 10 year requirement because i think that you know we really want to help the long terms tenants that will be much more anxious if they get evictions verse one that has been living in the units for one to two years we should be supporting that amendment. Thank you, supervisor kim. Supervisor tang thank you, very much for the discussion i said to one more thing that is not you know solution for everything i wanted to mention weve our office drafted legislative legislation were waiting for the legislation were going to require that when someone is filing paperwork notifying the city about an eviction the city sends that individual a notice about the Affordable Housing that is available through the citys malice program we feel this is one way to reach the tenants if they dont know about the program theyre not obviously going to apply that is one basic step up to the plate step we can take to require the city to provide the notifications to see people getting evicted so again, i think this legislation go passes were eager to layer that on top of this and so again colleagues, i do want to thank you for your condominiums ii think we have pend on deck the Affordable Housing Bonus Program that ive a cosponsor of and so to speak status quo to the comments and hoping to accommodate more residents on the west side and on deck and look forward to working with each the supervisors to make that happen thank you very much. Thank you supervisor tang supervisor campos. Thank you madam president i want to note on the owner movein eviction ill not be supporting that but something to consider director bordens my hope if were willing to look at the issue of providing a preference through this program that another thing we want to consider is whether or not we need to revisit the rules and provide additional protection around o m i did is a problem in some parts of district essential that is a large section i hope that happens. Thank you supervisor mar. To supervisor tangs points about the o m i perch i guess i appreciate the attempt to certify the tenants that will help residents that new district as well given the San Francisco Transportation Authority plans Programs Committee staff that supervisor kim gave residents that have been displaced as a result of the organization m i evictions i guess my concern is that this is all giving a false hope por favor 0 people that are displaced and forced from their home the lottery system within a lottery system when there is inadequate amounts of Affordable Housing coming online we move forward as a city but creates that people fighting over crumbles and not a real solution i think we need a careful study of the different groups of people evicted and giving an alleged apprehensive how it impacts other groups as well thats example ill be voting no, im going to stick my neck out for the africanamerican and displacement of whole ethic and rational or racial communities that onesizefitsall didnt carve out the neighborhoods most in need and have two broad of a stroke including the districts not having the displacements that the Mission District and the africanamerican and the bayview Hunters Point and placed like uc berkleyist displacement reach studies it show that many of the advanced stages of gentrification and the south of market well be talking about in a couple of minutes i know of of feel that a onesizefitsall approach is not the right one it has the danger of pitting communities of color against each other though im supportive of the africanamerican efforts to maintain their communities this is not the rights approach ill be casting a no vote. Thank you seeing no other names on the rosters well take commissioner sanchez amendments one by one and the City Attorney has comments regarding the owner movein represents so recommendation so schaung has made a motion to do annual reporting is there a second seconded by supervisor cowen madam clerk call the roll on the amendment. Schoolz supervisor avalos. Just a point of clarification. Each supervisor tang has proposed 3 amendments. Right whats the First Amendment. Providing annual reporting. It is it was moved by supervisor tang and sect by supervisor cowen. Madam clerk call the roll. And madam president for classification when supervisor tang read those items they read them backwards. Im confused. Okay. Please call the roll. Commissioner avalos. Reporting way on annual report. Correct. Commissioner avalos supervisor breed supervisor campos. Supervisor christensen supervisor cowen supervisor farrell supervisor kim supervisor mar supervisor tang supervisor wiener supervisor yee there are 11 is. Okay. This amendment is adopted unanimously on the next amendment which will be the doctor from 40 percent to thirty percent it was moved by supervisor tang and is there a second. Seeing none, the motion fails and on the o m i our deputy City Attorney john gibner, deputy City Attorney can you provide us with an explanation avenue what youre suggesting regarding o m i evictions. John gibner, deputy City Attorney speaking with supervisor tang on the does the substituteed is the changing to the tenants displacement and findings the sections of the ordinance overseeing facts is the number of evictions citywide and increasing into 2010 to 2014 housing is dmrrg unaffordable to the majority of san franciscans so displacement through evictions leads to san franciscans not in the city and one the Public Purposes of the Tenants Preference is to enable residents to stay in the city if possible well recommend that the board add in those finding as part of the proposed amendment. Okay. Before we move on this we need language i need language before i make a decision about this. Im happy to read the language in the initial substitute ordinance. Just to be clear does that mean this will not count as the First Reading or have to go back to committee . The two the amendment that the board has voted on does not require a continuance so the board could adopt the ordinance on First Reading with that the o m i meant supervisor tang proposed with or without the language im suggesting the board could denouncement today and pass the ordinance on First Reading nun of the ordinances that were proposed so for will go back to the Planning Commission. Supervisor tang have you passed the language for youre showcasing proposed amendment. Yes. I wanted earlier. Im sorry, i dont have it in my possession oh, this. Okay. And can you read the ifktd bordering and sure john gibner, deputy City Attorney again so the first efktd 3 understanding were removed in committee that would be at back in as part of supervisor tangs proposal the first finding is that from 2010 to 2014 the eviction notices with the rent board increased 45 percent and in specific neighbors the mission and the Outer Richmond and on the percent were significantly higher than the city average and the second proposed finding read San Francisco tenants are bag displaced through eviction and current marketrate rents are not affordable thus when the displacements occurs rhyming in San Francisco is not a viable option for more residents especially protecting and moderate income hours and the next for the Affordable Housing is necessary to achieve the purpose of increasing the opportunities for those residents to continue to live in San Francisco even as market rate housing rents rise. Okay. So supervisor tang has made a motion to move this amendment forward seconded by supervisor yee madam clerk madam clerk, please call the roll. Commissioner avalos supervisor breed no supervisor campos no supervisor christensen supervisor cowen no supervisor farrell no supervisor kim supervisor mar no supervisor tang supervisor wiener supervisor yee there are 6 is and 5 notice with sxhooemd supervisor campos supervisor cowen and supervisor mar in the dissent the amendment passes on the pamphlet as amended. Schoomz supervisor campos supervisor president london breed supervisor campos supervisor christensen supervisor cowen supervisor farrell supervisor kim supervisor mar no supervisor tang no. Supervisor wiener supervisor yee there are 9 is with two notices supervisor mar and supervisor tang in the dissent the item passes as amended on the First Reading clapping. madam clerk go to our 2 oclock accommodations starting with supervisor yee. Thank you supervisor president london breed colleagues this pass sunday on november 15th our city took part in its first raw day of remembrance for road traffic victims the world day is a Global Action to honor those killed or injured we road collisions together with advocates and the families and friends i would recycle to honor this day at the board of supervisors this year really marks the 10 anniversary the adoption of the world day of remembrance by the General Assembly in the 20th anniversary of the Global Remedies their common place we over look rookie those tragedies can i supervisor president london breed i mean supervisor president london breed can i wait a minute. Oh, yes. Members of the public can you please exits the chamber quietly 53 we still have business to 3 we still have buss t to we still have business to the chamber quietly we still have business to conduct. Thank you can you exit quietly thank you very much. And to members of the public if youre coming into the chamber please keep the noise level down commissioner Vice President low has a very important accumulation to show some respect to the people that hes honoring much. Thank you very much supervisor president london breed i also like to mention when i was there with several of my colleagues this past sunday it was really heartfelt to listen to the stories of the people to talk about their relatives that passed or struggling to recover from their tragedies i mean, im fortunate i got banged you will by a car it took me of months to recover i feel like im recovered when i heard those other stories of people that had been seriously injured theyre struggling avenue year and trying to remember the impact for families and their loved ones whether they did person device from the tragedy or gets seriously injured every year over one. 3 Million People are killed Global Warming this is u. S. Bancorp acceptable they can be prevented by making streets survey and improving the driver behalf and the increasing the Government Entities last year the board newsom adopted vision zero by educating the public open Traffic Safety and endorsing the laws and adopting policies that saves lives we hope that vision zero to put an end to all pedestrian deaths by the year 2024 but we have a long ways to go San Franciscos has the highest percent in 201334 vehicle relate death in our street and last year that number was slightly reduced to 29 and overall thirty people are killed and injured in traffic incidents in the city i want to thank overseeing people in walk sf and others communities of the vision zero for their tireless work to push those important issue though the forefront and want to acknowledge the survivors of Crash Victims that are dedicated to making our streets safer because you are out of and youre showcasing efforts were moving color to meeting our vision zero goals and make sure that no other families will have to endure the loss of a loved one that so many hsa have faced in the city streets we want to ask our state representatives on the legislation there to step up they need to help us we cannot do it locally we need laws passed at the state level including allowing local jurisdictions to put up Safety Cameras including having regulations that regulate our tougher bus more closely those are the similar things people can do and act on it now so is supervisor kim in the room . No okay. Right now id like to ask monique up to say a few words monique survived a crash in 2013 since then shes been dedicated to go make our streets safer id like to also advocate the survivors and friends of those who have been victims of road traffic to receive this special accommodations i will be giving okay monique. Hi first of all, thank you supervisor mar, supervisor kim and supervisor wiener for coming out only sunday memoriam for traffic victims it was nice to see you guys it warmed any heart thank you. I just want to share my story two years ago i was crossing the street and hit by a driver going 40 Miles Per Hour suffered a brain injury and had brain injury and been in rehab to train myself to walk again, i lost my research job at uc berkley and he no longer have the help going to graduate School Every Day i suffer from any memory and this process is slower and my attention is not the same my life has really changed the saddest part of all that i was preventable you know if it can happen to me it can happen to you or youre showcasing family members do you think i want my mom or dad or brother are boyfriend walking the streets in San Francisco you dont, no i dont feel it is a safe city to walk so i ask to please act quickly and push for ground zero or distortion and lets support the Great Organization like walk sf to reengineering over streets to educate and get more awareness around this issue of Traffic Safety and to enforce some of the laws to make sure that drivers are not driving recklessly again, if it can happen to me honestly it can happen to any one of us thank you. clapping. thank you supervisor yee now id like to recognize supervisor mar. Thank you supervisor president london breed colleagues we are honored in the chambers with a long time rent board and richmond board person acknowledge minimum for the reernts and landlords in the city the gentleman has a long history for service for the city and county of San Francisco in 1973 hired by the economic e oc for the Head Start Program thank you for supporting the low income mr. Wong was not limited to to the state bar a couple of years literary and 77 hiring by the Mayors Office training as part find comprehensive came back ac to oversee programs in 83 hiring by the rent board where hes developed more friendships his contributions to the rent board were many including the Capital Improvement and the evictions units mr. Wong was a residence of the Richmond District for over thirty years and hes known in chinatown as quote the rent board and he brought with him a difference skill set with a familiarity with the rent board laws and the ability to communicate with people regardless ever their background from others nabtsz as an attorney understanding the complex case while have the ability to explain the laws and chop it up fountain for the law person and because of his understanding the community and its infinite patience with people he made measurable contributions to the landlord communities bringing a sense of fair practice to the workingings the rent board hes here with his partner and family members and rent board staff and colleagues lets give a hand a round of applause for the gentleman for his service clapping. please come forward mr. Wong clapping. please come forward mr. Wong clapping. wed like for you to say. Few words if you can. Well, thank you supervisors and the city and county of San Francisco this was unaccepted and probably under deserved i really want to thank you city and county of San Francisco for the privilege of work with the most excelled group of people ive ever met most talented and dedicated people ive ever met at the San Francisco rent board and a number of members are here with us today. Thank you and thank you, supervisors, thank you San Francisco, and keep safe thank you very much clapping. okay. Colleagues now we will go to our 3 00 a. M. Special order madam clerk this will bring us to the first 3 00 p. M. Special order and somewhat complicated we have before us appeals for the 5m project in district 6 there are 3 appeals related to the Environmental Impact report the conditional use authorization, and the Office Allocation were going to hear all 3 appeals together apparently, there are piece of legislation potentially 30 years the project a general plan amendment the creation of a special use district and a development all the time that is a complex set of appeals to lemon quickly explain today is procedure ive received with the it dont make any difference and our clerk ill get to that well hear the 3 appeals together and the board will have even though on the Environmental Impact report it takes of votes to either affirm or reverse the Internal Revenue if the eir is reegd not other approval action about took place and table the other items the eir is upheld well will vote on 3 pieces of authorizing legislation that may seem premature on the conditional use but we need 0 votes open is authorizing legislation first, because no cu or Office Allocations to appeal unless the board has adopted the ordinances creating the 5m special use district from the ordinances fail no need to vote on the cu or the Office Allocation in the ordinances pass we will vote on the cu appeal it requires 8 votes to overturn the Planning Department decision there well vote on the Office Allocation appeals it only requires 6 votes to overturn the allocation here we go so madam clerk call items 15 through 25. Item 15 through 18 comprise the persons interested in the Planning Commission for this Environmental Impact report dated september 17, 2015, for the property mixed use project on Mission Street and near parks as long as the 5m project item 16 the motion to affirm the certification of the eir prepared for the 5m project and 1800 to reverse the Commission Certification item 18 a motion to direct the preparation of finding related to the reserveer e. R. Reversedal and comprise of hearing the certification of the conditional use authorization dated cement 17 additionally a related approval and allocation of Office Square feet for the mixed use project on Mission Street item 20 the motion to approve the commissions certification and approve the conditional use authorization for the 5m project item 21 the item is it reverse the commissions decisions approving the confusion and item 22 the motion indirectly the preparation of finding related to the reversal the conditional use authorization item 23 is the motion to approve the Commission Decision and approve the allocation of Office Square footage under the 20142015 annual limits program for two buildings known as the h1 and m site on Mission Street team 24 the motion to reverse the Commission Decisions and approve the Office Square footage for the m and one m and the direction of the finding for the reversal the Office Allocation approval. Before i call on supervisor kim for this hearing we will be considering whether to approve the Planning Commission certification of the Environmental Impact reports then the Planning Commission conditional use authorization and then the Planning Commission Office Allocation sore suns were combining the appeals ive worked with the City Attorneys office to provide speakers with a bit more time so well take that without objection. Well precede as follows up to 15 manipulates for a presentation but is appellants or the appellant representative, up to 3 minutes per speaker in support of appeal, up to 15 mimics or minutes for a presentation from city departments, up to 15 minutes for the project sponsor or their representative, up to 3 minutes per speaker in opposition to the appeal in support of project and finally up it 5 minutes for rebuttal by the appellants or the appellants representative so, please note if youre here to speak in for or against this project this will be the time to do it and not in general general Public Comment so with that, i want call on supervisor kim for Opening Statements before we begin. Thank you supervisor president london breed ill make brief remarks before the eir and conditional use authorization and the Office Allocation approval the 5m is a project for forest city and Hearst Corporation in november of 2011 actually 4 years ago it has been quite a road to get to the final approval and i want to acknowledge this forest city has been engaged with our office and in the neighborhood throughout those 4 years as with any large project and in particular a special use the scope underlying envelope and changes should be fully vetted by the public im looking forward to a full discussion on the adequacy and completeness the eir and the appropriateness of the conditional use authorization Office Allocations approved by the commission in september and looking forward to hearing from the public on all audits on their thoughts and forbes e feedback this whether have a huge february in the heart of south of market i think a lot of good points and feedback have come through much has been included in the project, however, this is the opportunities and point at which the members of the public should engage with the board on what they want to see and look forward to hearing and opinions by the appellants and members of the public okay. Thank you supervisor well take that without objection. We will now open our hearing and begin up to 15 minutes by the appellants or the appellants representative. Good afternoon madam president and supervisors my name is rachel with prudently and slot im the attorney that is representing the forest city sense group that files the appeal south of Market Action committee known as snack south of Market Action network came and s o s and friends the balboa park as noticed the appeal is based on the outlooks submitted regarding the certification of the eir and is adaptation of finding in the state offering riding considerations the allocation of the Square Footage under the annual office approval and the conditional use. Be closer to the mike please. I need my notes. Okay. So we submitted substantive comments on each of those issues and we did that through our appeal packets on october 16th, november 6th, and 11 and those included the citizens of the exhibits a there h then yesterdays we submitted comments on the general plan amendment the development all the time and the special shade limits on balboa park so regarding the eir accuracy i want to note that im not going to go on and on here i want for the board to hear the publics response to this and we want to note those are just highlights our comments were substantive and definitive and quits pursue scuff ill directing your attention to those issues regarding the eir adequacy as the boards aware adaptation of all the prouflz are balances on the adequacy of the eir the adequacy of the eir has been challenged then the project cant be proposed so this is a type of law i do i look at ceqa adequacy and projects and determine whether they have or qualified to make the accessories they do in the iritis my professional opinion this eir is defective that it is grossly defetch and any approval at risk until this requiring is amended and recirculated so the basic issue that comes to you with any eir is the project description accurate all of the rest of the analyses in the eir are bans this components or adequacy and description here as pointed out the proponent proposed two different schemes or scenarios and unfortunately, the eir did not analysis the various schemes in a like manner so the adequacy of the analyzed impacts is defective you dont have the basis for comparison to a specific project so adrc complications to this the final eir proposed a different project different from those two scenarios and entirely different project so the eir analysis hes didnt consider this project in depth we say no problem with the eir whether you have a project description it is confusing that is impossible for the public to adequate will i championing on the project for objective reasons they dont know what project their commenting on and expanding cant analysis the report because they looked 3 different schemes not a single project that is in definite violation to the threshold issue for second compliance so even if the eir was without any other defect this key fact will render the entire eir inadequate so therefore we request that the board reject the certification and require the eir and send that back to the mramg planning with one description that analyses each the implicates and the alternatives are compared to here since there was two different scenarios a different project in the final one was a narrow analysis they were not compared to a single project so then i want to highlight some that is the Biggest Issue for the board of supervisors it precedes every other questions that preceded today is that document adequate, did it provide notice of what the project proposes, did the analysis a specific project and if not then we suggest that it is not appropriate foreign the project approval so just to highlight some of the other issues with the eir for example, the eir is handing the traffic impact the eir artificially reduced the study so the steady area had impacts so certain intersections had bulge impacts and within adjacent impacts that one would might have impacts to jabts to the impacts in their not reviewed so the impacts study was two small and the Internal Revenue adequacy it bans all the foreseeable impacts that is foreseeable to have an impact an impacted intersection would be adjacent to another impacted intersection that was not studied in consideration of the adequacy of the open space and regarding the shade project the project proposes shading with itself own open space since it was the project that was very similar to the preservation alternative that was proposed as the project that alternative was initially rejected because of the proposed wind impacts it is the interior spaces of that project proposing proposal has some of the highest wind effects of any place in the project that is where the open space is proposed since the wind studies were can you think on the other project proposals and not in depth we feel the wind studies are i think adequate it shows the open space is windy and shady this does accurately show a space for this size the open Space Advisory Committee passed a resolution asking the board to extend the project so that more studies to be done on this issue and as i say in the records theres a lot of evidence regarding everyone or each and every part of the open space for this project shade and shadow impacts are large and the friends of the balboa park virtually wrote a letter and submitted it yesterday on this issue and we believe that the impacts for balboa park not sufficiently analyzed and the eir should have anytime the impacts prior to raising the threshold to balboa park the Planning Commissioner cindy one way or another said a few cases it was expand in all of the cases the project proposed far more Affordable Housing than this project does, in fact, in order to raise the limit the projects that were approved some of them were 100 percent avenue so the recreations should be high and there should be strong reasons to change that protection for the parks for San Francisco especially theres a special Natural Resource within is urban environment they should be valued critically and the other interesting thing about that so were looking at adopt a statement of the consideration when a project has remaining impacts then the city may look at the benefits of the project and is those are over ridden and we adopt the project anyway but the one thing that is forgotten that it is never adopted until the project has been adequately analyzed and until all litigations and alternatives have been considered so coordinators an agent ant cant from impacts to override the first month adequately analyzing the impacts and looking at the mitigation and alternatives here it is during the testimony at Planning Commission hearing that the buildings could be easily rearranged to avoid shadows on balboa park so thats the situation where lots of people care about that and there should have been an alternative considered that avoided the impacts we didnt have to look at raising the limits of balboa park so then the other issue was was this project adequately acted for cumulative impacts and unfortunately, the eir used an outdated study in 2012 that was done during the recession and prior to the growth that this area hsa has seen as to the analysis cumulative impacts it i think adequate it was based on an old study another area a lot has been written in inconsistency with the area plan the project it is inconsistent with any codes and policies and lists each one and why it is inconsistent but what the Internal Revenue did wrong with this argument is the eir navld the consistency with the proposed general plan amendments in place will thats not how it works you look at the project under the applicable codes and consider what impact amend that project will have here the eir does the reverse it considered the project under the amendments it was consistent this is constitutes no analysis whatsoever and then one the last assertions is that the project constitutes spot zoning so our assertion this project has been artificially separated from the planning provision of the eastern neighborhoods the central selma plan, and instead of rezone as a do you only i downtown special development is supporting zoning so this project amends the height and unbelievable limits if the downtown zone those amendments are more appropriate theyre similar in scale it the Financial Development north of market and transbay to the east so in terms of the zoning applications are not in the way it looks at the consistency of the area plan and this prohibited spot zoning it is hidden with the analysis of eir so it is should be done more adequately so it could be more apparent my time is about up and thats all i have to say and i do urge you to look at the substance comments that have been a lot of time by people that care about south of market and youre not against this project per say but feel that it really should be amended to respect areas surrounding area policies and that this project can be maids to be more appropriate as a step down step up project within south of market. So thank you very much at the appreciate your time. Thank you, supervisor kim you have questions. I do have a question for the appellant. On what you considered the underlying arguments or the most more argument in the appeal in terms of instead of instead of the project makers must looking at look at 3 areas for the reichs description and the Internal Revenue stage meant the public was excluded if commenting just to speak on this point what are the more substantive oversights in the project description and the alternates from the current project as finally negotiated you felt. The services analysis. Well it is good to make the statement nothing you thought the oversight was in the study. Well, i disagree i believe that we mentioned all of those points and just the fact they were 3 different project descriptions you dont have to go further that if thats okay most of large projects before the board there are multiple project descriptions and alternatives and the final be negotiated project that comes before the board tends to be a mixture of the multiple projects it continuing comes up in large projects never the project is the same when it comes to the final boards how is this different from any large project and the major substantive oversight that has not been analyzed in this study you feel that we should looked at in order to reopen the eir. I reviewed the projects myself and what i see happening is youre right that projects evolves and change and anymore utilization is proposed, etc. But you have kind of a confluence ever problems the project was not fully identified not a single project to gentile with thats the initial problem itself dangerous there are several projects proposed not true under second a definite stable you have to start out that way and the other thing when i see projects amended thats after the project Environmental Review has been completely for this project in terms of a full discussion of impacts of a sage project you have all of the alternatives compared to that single project and then youre fully at easy to look at the amendment and mitigation and adopts them not within the financial eir you presented with a new project and if those happenhe
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.